MASTER POINT PRESS • TORONTO, CANADA

Text © 2011 Boye Brogeland and David Bird

Cover Image © Luise Lee Designs

All rights reserved. It is illegal to reproduce any portion of this material, except
by special arrangement with the publisher. Reproduction of this material without
authorization, by any duplication process whatsoever, is a violation of copyright.

Master Point Press

331 Douglas Ave.
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
M5M 1H2 (416)781-0351

Email: info@masterpointpress.com

Websites: www.masterpointpress.com
www.teachbridge.com
www.bridgeblogging.com
www.ebooksbridge.com

Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication

Brogeland, Boye
Bridge at the edge [electronic resource] / Boye Brogeland and David
Bird.

Electronic monograph.
Issued also in print format.
ISBN 978-1-55494-174-2 (PDF).--ISBN 978-1-55494-433-0 (HTML)

1. Contract bridge. I. Bird, David, 1946- II. Title.

GV1282.3.B75 2011a 795.41’5 C2011-906225-9

Editor Ray Lee

Copy editor/interior format Sally Sparrow
Cover and interior design Olena S. Sullivan/New Mediatrix
 Acknowledgements

In bringing these deals back to life, we are indebted to those who chronicle our
great game. Foremost in our minds is Jon Sveindal, who described many of them in
his splendid bridge column for the Oslo newspaper, Aftenposten. Many thanks to
him! For several years now, the excellent website Bridge Base Online has broadcast
— free of charge to users — the world’s finest championships. Nikos Sarantakos
maintains the records of these broadcasts on his excellent VuGraph Project website:

http://www.sarantakos.com/bridge/vugraph.html

We retrieved the details of many deals from this source and thank Nikos warmly.
We acknowledge also the annual world championship books, edited by Brian
Senior and a prerequisite of any bridge lover’s library. Finally, our thanks go to
Christian Vennerød, who wrote some emotive articles in English on Norway’s win
in the 2008 European Championship.
David Bird and Boye Brogeland

Photo credits:

Boye Brogeland’s Partners:

Photo of Erik ‘Silla’ Sælensminde by Svein Erik Dahl.
Photo of Espen Erichsen by Trond Høiness.
Photo of Espen Lindqvist by Christian Vennerød.
Photos of Øyvind Saur and Odin Svendsen by Svein Erik Dahl.
Photo of Tonje Aasand Brogeland by Christian Vennerød.

Photo insert
Photos 1 and 2 by Agnès Fabre.
Photo 3 by Agnès Fabre.
Photo 4 by Christian Vennerød.
Photo 5 by Brent Manley.
Photo 6 by Christian Vennerød.
 Foreword

One of the privileges open to a bridge writer is the chance to co-author a book with
a world-class player — to delve inside their bridge mind and perhaps discover a
secret or two on how they have achieved so much success. I have been fortunate
to do this with some of the world’s best players and it has always been a rewarding
experience.
Boye Brogeland is an exceptionally bold and adventurous player, following his
instinct and taking risks that few others would contemplate. Most unusually, he
is very happy to publicize his failures as well as his successes. During the 2010
European Championship he and Svendsen bid to a small slam, missing the ace
and king of trumps. I emailed him, ‘Can you explain the bidding on that spade
slam against Germany? Obviously we won’t use the deal in the book, but I’d like
to understand what the bids meant.’ Boye responded, ‘Of course you must put it
into the book! It was a very interesting bidding problem.’ You will find the deal
on page 214.
This book contains some 190 deals played by Boye at championship level.
They illustrate the thrilling highs and depressing lows of top-level championship
bridge. Boye and I have done our very best to convey the buzz and excitement of
playing ‘bridge at the edge’. Have we succeeded in this task? Only you can say.

David Bird
September, 2011
 Contents

Introduction9
Boye Brogeland’s Partners 11
1 Through the Back of the Cards 13
2 Slam Bidding Mechanics 25
3 Rescue Operations 39
4 There’s No Justice! 51
5 Interesting Bidding Treatments 63
6 Find the Lady 71
7 Winning the Great Race 77
8 Opening Leads — Inspired and Uninspired 87
9 Slam Adventures 103
10 Delayed Heart Attack 117
11 Technical Mastery 121
12 Three Slams in Shanghai 135
13 Defend with Your Life 141
14 Toil and Trouble 151
15 Battles Around the Trump Suit 163
16 Enter the Illusionist 171
17 Extracting the Maximum Penalty 189
18 Extending the Use of Transfer Bids 195
19 Train Off the Rails! 207
20 In the Fast Lane 223
21 Back-to-Back Grand Slams in Pau 241
 Introduction

What is it that gets your juices flowing playing bridge? Is it a neatly timed
elimination and throw-in, a perfectly executed double squeeze, or thirteen rounds
of relays to get to the optimal spot? Maybe it’s wielding the axe on your opponents
and collecting a big number? All that stuff gets me excited too, but I find it even
more thrilling to make a bid, a lead or a play — successful or not — that no
textbook will ever recommend.
‘Avoid big penalties’ is a common maxim, especially playing IMPs or rubber
bridge. Sensible as it may seem, I will go out of my way to help partner to find
the right lead; I open light third in hand, I overcall on decent four-card suits, and I
double Stayman or a transfer bid with any suit — long or short — that screams for
the lead. If this means I look stupid from time to time when my opponents catch
me speeding, so be it. In the long run I believe it is the right approach.
‘Never underlead an ace against a trump contract’ is another adage that bridge
players are familiar with. Well, going against the mainstream can be extremely
effective. No declarer expects it, and faced with a king-jack choice in dummy
at Trick 1 he is almost certainly doomed. As long as you (and your partner) can
stomach finding the occasional stiff king in dummy, underleading an ace is far less
dangerous than most people think.
‘Don’t risk your contract trying to make an overtrick’ is sound advice for IMPs
and rubber bridge, but don’t bank on it. There are situations when the likelihood
of an overtrick is so high that you should play for it even though you risk going
down in a cold contract. Math is a better guidance than the rule of thumb you were
once taught. You have to bear in mind, though, that you have to explain to your
teammates when you call out minus 100 at the comparison.
My most memorable ‘minus 100’ happened in the final of the Bermuda Bowl in
Paris in 2001. I was declarer in a 3NT contract that had nine top winners after the
lead. Rather than securing the contract and keeping my partner and teammates at
ease, I tried for an overtrick since only a really unlucky lie of the cards would put
me in any danger. Rose Meltzer and Kyle Larsen were happy to be given the chance
to collect the next five tricks. Down one. And USA went on to win a close final.
In Shanghai in 2007 it was déjà vu. Norway was in the Bermuda Bowl final
against the USA. I was declaring 3NT on the last board of a segment and had nine
top tricks. I cashed eight of them and was left with the ace-queen of spades and a
couple of diamonds in dummy. Based on my opponents’ discards I was pretty sure
that the king of spades was onside. Should I play it safe to avoid a possible disaster
like six years ago, or should I follow my instincts?

Introduction | 9
 My adrenalin was pumping. I asked myself how it would feel to lose the final
by one IMP, knowing that an overtrick on this very hand could have made the
difference. To me, that would be the worst case scenario, so I couldn’t chicken out.
I took the finesse.
Zia Mahmood, who has been my idol ever since I read his Bols Tip, ‘Roll Over
Houdini’, won the king of spades and literally stood up to cash a winner. Now I
was down to a guess — which two cards Michael Rosenberg had left. I was lucky:
I got it right, I made the contract and we went on to win Norway’s first Bermuda
Bowl.
Don’t play it safe. Play at the edge.

Boye Brogeland

10 | Bridge at the Edge

Boye Brogeland’s Partners

Erik ‘Silla’ Sælensminde. Boye met Erik when he

was a student at the Norwegian School of Economics
in Bergen. They adopted the Precision system and
first made their mark in national events during 1993.
Three years later they represented Norway in the Nordic
Championships. The Rhodes Olympiad followed and
then six consecutive European championships, where
they collected one silver and four bronze medals. In
five Bermuda Bowls they won one gold medal, one silver
and one bronze. After the Bermuda Bowl triumph in
Shanghai (2007) Boye and Erik decided to end their
partnership on a high after fifteen years together.

Espen Erichsen. Espen and Boye were teammates

in the Norwegian junior team that won the European
championship in 1996 and were runners-up in the
World Championship in 1997. In 1999 Espen moved to
London to play in TGR’s rubber bridge club. Espen and
Boye have played together in five Cavendish Invitationals
in Las Vegas, twice finishing in the money.

Espen Lindqvist. Boye and Espen formed a partnership

in 2008 and just three months later topped the Butler
scoring in the European Championship, where Norway
took the gold medal. This was the first win for Norway
in the event, following seven consecutive victories by
Italy. In the 2009 Bermuda Bowl, Boye and Espen came
second in the Butler scoring and Norway reached the
quarter finals, where they played China. Trailing by
47.5 IMPs with 16 boards remaining, Norway finished
strongly and took the lead 3 boards from the end. A
swing on the penultimate board gave China victory by
2.5 IMPs.

Boye Brogeland’s Partners | 11

 Øyvind Saur. A dentist nowadays, Saur was Boye’s
partner from 1995 to 1999. They were the anchor
pair in the Norwegian junior team, winning the Nordic
Championships in 1995, the European Championships
in 1996, and two Youth Bridge championships in the
Netherlands. In 1997 Norway lost a hard fought final
against Denmark in the World Junior Championships
played in Canada. Saur is an inventive player with great
card sense. Never missing a chance to take a backwards
finesse, he is also the man behind the Peanut Butter
Coup; when a Belgian declarer played the ace from
a trump holding of A-x-x-x opposite Q-x-x-x, Saur
dropped the king from K-J-10! Persuaded that trumps
were 4-1, declarer then went one down.

Odin Svendsen. Odin and Boye were selected to play

for Norway in the 2010 European Championships in
Ostende. Norway, the defending champions, finished
in a disappointing 14th place. Odin and Boye had a
satisfactory tournament, finishing as the 6th-ranked pair
in the Butler scoring.
Svendsen captained the Norway ladies team when
they took 4th place in the 2000 Olympiad in Maastricht.

Tonje Aasand Brogeland. Tonje and Boye met as

students in 1994 and have been together since 1997.
She soon became a keen bridge player — mentored by
Boye’s partner, Øyvind Saur. In the European Open in
Tenerife (2005), with their son Anders only two months
old, Tonje and Boye won the Mixed Teams, together with
Helen and Espen Erichsen, Gunn and Tor Helness. They
have reached four European championship mixed pair
finals, with a 5th place in San Remo (2009) their best
result.

12 | Bridge at the Edge

 1
Through the Back
of the Cards

How does a skilled declarer read the lie of the cards? He gathers evidence from a
variety of sources: bids made by the opponents, bids not made by the opponents,
the opening lead and defensive signals. He may also draw inferences from the
chosen line of defense. Sometimes he will place a particular card or cards with
one defender because the contract cannot be made unless that is the case. This
assumption may lead him to conclude that the other defender holds some other
vital missing card.
In this chapter we will look at some deals where Boye managed to read the
cards successfully. We start with a deal where declarer has to find the J to make
his contract.

1 Through the Back of the Cards | 13

 N-S Vul.  A Q 10 5 2003 Euro Open mixed teams
Dealer East  A K J 6 Menton, France
 K Q 10
 92
 9 8 4  J72
 7 5 4 N  10 8 3
 9 6 5 4 2 W E  A
S
 A6  KJ8543
 K63
 Q92
 J873
 Q 10 7

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Molson Aasand Seamon Brogeland
pass pass
pass 1 2 2
pass 3 pass 3NT
all pass

Playing with his wife-to-be, Tonje, Boye ended in 3NT. When West led ace and
another club, East won with the K and cleared the club suit, her partner throwing
a diamond. All now depended on declarer scoring four spade tricks, to go alongside
four hearts and one club. Since East had started with six clubs to West’s two, the
initial odds suggested that West would hold more spades than East. In that case
a finesse against the J would be necessary if the card did not fall on the first two
rounds.
Before playing spades, it is natural to seek some clues by cashing four rounds of
hearts. The suit breaks 3-3 and let us suppose that West discards another diamond
while East throws a club. How should declarer read the spade suit?
If East’s hand is something like

 7 2  10 8 3  A 5  K J 8 5 4 3

she can afford to discard a club, while still keeping enough clubs to beat the
contract. Would anyone actually discard this way when they had the useless 5 to
pitch? If you judge it unlikely, you should read East for the hand that she actually
held and therefore play for the drop on the third round of spades.
What happened at the table, then? Er, well… when East cleared the club suit
she had the chance to give a suit preference signal. Rather than indicate the A
clearly, with a low club, she actually attempted a deception by signaling an entry
in spades. This caused West to discard a spade on the last round of hearts, so
Boye was never actually faced with the spade guess. However, he did reassure the

14 | Bridge at the Edge

distressed defenders that he would have read the spade suit correctly if West had
not made the fatal spade discard. (What a gentleman!)
Boye has never won the prestigious Norwegian Pairs, although he is determined
to do so one day. In 1996 he and Erik Sælensminde racked up a sensational score
but still finished behind Geir Helgemo and Lasse Aaseng. Boye’s consolation was to
win the Best Played Hand award, for reading the cards well on this deal:

N-S Vul.  A 4 2 1996 Norwegian Pairs

Dealer South  2 Ulvik
 93
 J 10 9 8 7 5 2
 Q J 10 9 7 5 3  8
 J 10 8 N  Q74
 10 4 2 W E  QJ85
S
 —  KQ643
 K6
 AK9653
 AK76
 A

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
2
4 dbl pass 5
all pass

Erik Sælensminde’s double showed some values, around 5 points or more. How
would you tackle 5 when West makes the rather strange lead of the 9?
Even if trumps break 3-3, which is less likely than normal after West’s preempt,
you will still need to avoid three losers in the red suits. Boye won the first trick
with the K. West presumably held seven spades, so the 9 lead was suspicious. It
suggested that he was void in one of the minor suits and was trying to put East on
lead to deliver a ruff. Boye saw that there was no point in trying to ruff a diamond
in dummy. Even if the ruff passed by without accident, he would have no entry
back to his hand. A club to the ace would surely be ruffed by West.
Boye continued by playing three rounds of trumps. The suit broke 3-3, he was
pleased to see, and East won the third round with the queen. Boye won the low
club return with the ace, West throwing a spade. The only chance of making the
contract was an eventual squeeze and his next move was a low diamond towards
the dummy. West does best to rise with the 10 and play a spade, killing the entry
to dummy before declarer can make use of it. He chose to play low instead and East
won dummy’s 9 with the J. These cards remained:

1 Through the Back of the Cards | 15

  A4
 —
 3
 J 10 9 8
 Q J 10 7 5  —
 — N  —
 10 4 W E  Q85
S
 —  KQ64
 6
 965
 AK7
 —

At this stage East could break the squeeze by returning a diamond. He preferred a
‘safe’ K and that was curtains for the defense. Boye ruffed, played his remaining
trumps and crossed to dummy with the A. On this trick East had no good discard
available from Q85 and the Q. He threw a diamond and Boye then scored three
diamond tricks for the contract.
The key to the next deal was reading the lie of the trump suit. Would you have
reached the same conclusion that Boye did?

Neither Vul.  K Q J 7 6 2 2008 Icelandair Teams

Dealer South  J 5 4 2 Reykjavik
 —
 A82
 9 8 4  A 10 3
 9 7 3 N  AQ
 J 9 6 4 2 W E  75
S
 Q 10  KJ9754
 5
 K 10 8 6
 A K Q 10 8 3
 63

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Gillis Brogeland
1
pass 1 2 2
pass 3 dbl 3
pass 4 all pass

16 | Bridge at the Edge

The heart fit was located and West led the Q, won with dummy’s A. Boye led a
low trump and East rose with the ace, continuing with the K and J. How would
you play from this point?
With a certain spade loser to come, Boye had to avoid a second loser in the
trump suit. East would need to hold the Q, obviously. If East started with AQ9,
declarer would have to ruff the third club with the 8; he could then ruff a diamond
and pick up the trump suit with a finesse of the 10. There would still be a likely
loser in the diamond suit, however.
East surely held six clubs to West’s two and was likely to be shorter than West
in the trump suit. Boye therefore ruffed the third round of clubs with the 10. He
then led the king of trumps, picking up East’s bare queen. Before drawing the last
trump, he cashed the AKQ, throwing dummy’s spot cards in spades. He then
crossed to the J, drawing West’s last trump, and claimed the contract. East would
score the A for the defenders’ third trick.
Play at the other table started the same way but declarer ruffed the third club
with the 8. An overruff and an eventual spade trick put the contract one down.
Boye’s team, captained by Simon Gillis, went on to win the event.
Much as one of the present authors dislikes part-score contracts, every bridge
book should surely contain at least one of them. Here it is: a 2 contract where the
opponents were the Katz team from the USA. As you will see, the point of interest
lies in reading the lie of the club suit.

Neither Vul.  K J 5 3 2005 Icelandair Teams

Dealer West  A 3 2 Reykjavik
 10 5 2
 KJ8
 A 6 4  10 7
 Q 6 4 N  J 10 8 5
 9 7 3 W E  AKQ64
S
 A954  Q6
 Q982
 K97
 J8
 10 7 3 2

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
pass 1 1 1
2 2 all pass

Three rounds of diamonds forced Boye to ruff. He played a trump to the king and a
second trump to the ten, queen and ace. West returned his remaining trump, won
in the South hand, and this was the position:

1 Through the Back of the Cards | 17

  J
 A32
 —
 KJ8
 —  —
 Q 6 4 N  J 10 8
 — W E  64
S
 A954  Q6
 —
 K97
 —
 10 7 3 2

How should declarer play the clubs? He can afford to lose two tricks in the suit
but he does need to establish two winners, so that he can discard a heart loser from
dummy.
Suppose you play a club to the jack. East will win with the queen and return
the J. If you win in the dummy and continue with the K, West will win with the
A and his remaining 95 will restrict you to only one club trick.
Perhaps it is better, as the cards lie, to play a club to the eight? Let’s see. East
wins with the Q and returns a heart to dummy’s ace. West wins your K with
the A, leaving your club holding blocked, and plays another heart to remove the
entry to the South hand. One down!
Only one play is good enough and Boye found it — a club to the king. When
he continued with the 8, East’s Q was expended on thin air. The heart switch
was won with dummy’s ace and the J then cleared a trick for declarer’s 10 while
the K remained as an entry.
How did Boye read the club position? Nothing was known of the heart
situation but he thought that East would have ventured 3 on the second round
with something like:

 10 7  J 10 8 5  A K Q 6 4  A 6

It was therefore more likely that West held the A.

When you are trying to read the lie of a suit, you should pay full attention
to the spot cards that fall early in the play. Would you have read the trump suit
correctly on the next deal?

18 | Bridge at the Edge

 E-W Vul.  Q 2007 Bermuda Bowl SF
Dealer West  8 7 6 5 Norway - Netherlands
 A9432
 Q93
 K 9  7 42
 10 3 N  K Q9
 Q 10 8 6 W E  K 75
S
 A 10 8 7 2  K J64
 A J 10 8 6 5 3
 AJ42
 J
 5

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

de Wijs Sælensminde Muller Brogeland
pass pass pass 1
pass 1NT pass 2NT
pass 3 pass 4
all pass

Boye’s 2NT rebid was artificial and game-forcing and he ended in 4. West led the
10 to East’s queen and declarer won with the ace. When he led his singleton club,
West rose with the A and crossed to partner’s K to receive a heart ruff.
It did not escape Boye’s attention that this ruff was taken with the 9. He ruffed
West’s club return and had to decide how to play the trump suit. Four trumps were
still out and many players would have crossed to the A to run the Q, hoping to
find East with Kx. This could be the case only if West had chosen to ruff with the
9 from a trump holding of 9-7-4, 9-7-2 or 9-4-2. It was possible, yes, particularly
in a world championship semi-final. Still, how many defenders would falsecard in
this way?
Boye decided it was more likely that West had begun with K9 and had been
forced to ruff with the 9. Instead of crossing to dummy for a trump finesse, he
played the A from his hand. Wonderful sight! The K fell from West and he made
the contract.
Show this hand to some of the players at your club and they may disagree with
declarer’s line. ‘West could easily be falsecarding,’ they will tell you. ‘I would take
the percentage line of crossing to dummy for a trump finesse.’
Our advice is that you will do far better in the long run to assume that a
defender is not falsecarding. Another piece of evidence on this particular deal is
that good players do not particularly like leading doubletons. They are more likely
to choose such a lead when they hold the ace or king of trumps; they may then
gain the lead with this card and have a second chance of scoring a ruff in the suit
that was led.

1 Through the Back of the Cards | 19

 At the other table Tor Helness led ace and another club. Declarer ruffed and
crossed to the A for a trump finesse. He could hardly play the contract otherwise
with two almost certain heart losers staring him in the face.
The next deal will give you a chance to test your own card reading. Take the
South cards here:

Neither Vul.  A K 5 2000 Spingold

Dealer South  7 Anaheim, California
 K Q 10 9 7 4
 863

N
W E
S

 Q 10 6
 KJ8
 A862
 K54

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Robson Sælensminde Shugart Brogeland
1
1 2 3 pass
pass 5 all pass

Andrew Robson led the A, Rita Shugart signaling discouragement with the 10.
How would you plan the play when West switches to a trump?
When you have decided, take a look at the whole deal:

 AK5
 7
 K Q 10 9 7 4
 863
 9 7 3  J842
 A Q 5 3 2 N  10 9 6 4
 5 3 W E  J
S
 A 10 9  QJ72
 Q 10 6
 KJ8
 A862
 K54

The early play has been: A, East discouraging, and a trump switch.

20 | Bridge at the Edge

 The opening lead has given you a tenth trick. If East holds the A, it will be
a simple matter to lead towards the K for the eleventh trick. Boye placed West
with the A, after his overcall, and aimed to endplay him. He played six rounds of
trumps, throwing two low clubs, and continued with the AKQ. With the South
hand reduced to the KJ and K, he intended to exit with the K, hoping that
West would win with the A and lead into the heart tenace.
Robson, whose last four cards were Q5 A10, still had to make one discard.
In an attempt to evade the throw-in, he discarded the A. This would have beaten
the contract if East held the K instead of the QJ. As the cards lay, Boye was able
to score the K and K, making his game.
On the next contract Boye read the lie of the clubs on the very first trick:

Both Vul.  10 8 7 3 1996 Nordic Championship

Dealer West  10 6 Faaborg, Denmark
 AK732
 98
 J 4 2  95
 J 7 5 3 N  AKQ98
 J 10 8 4 W E  Q9
S
 74  K Q 10 3
 AKQ6
 42
 65
 AJ652

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
pass pass 1 1
3 3 pass 4
all pass

How would you play when West leads the 7 to East’s Q?
Your first task is to determine how the clubs lie. When an unbid suit is led
after the defenders have found a fit, you might normally suspect that the lead is a
singleton. Boye discounted this possibility because East would surely have bid 4
if he held a 5-5 hand. It was unlikely that West had led from K107 in an unbid
suit, so Boye more or less placed West with 74. How could the contract be made
in that case?
Playing for a 3-3 diamond break is not a promising line because East’s shape
would then be 1-5-3-4 and the 4-1 trump break would be troublesome. Suppose
you win with the A, draw trumps in three rounds and cross to a diamond honor
to lead a club towards the jack. East will rise with the Q and with only one entry
left to your hand, you will not be able to establish and enjoy the thirteenth club.

1 Through the Back of the Cards | 21

 Boye tried something different — he allowed East’s Q to win the first
trick. East cashed two hearts and switched back to clubs. Boye finessed the J
successfully, drew trumps in three rounds and played the A. The suit divided 4-2
but this presented no problem now. He ruffed a club in dummy, establishing a long
card in the suit, and still had a trump entry to his hand.
Before we move on, did you spot any further point on that deal? East could
have defeated Boye’s line by playing a third round of hearts, giving a ruff-and-sluff!
It would no longer be possible to establish the clubs with a ruff and then return
with a diamond ruff to score the long club.
On the next deal Boye read the cards successfully after drawing clues from
various sources. Would you have found the winning line?

N-S Vul.  4 3 2004 Vanderbilt QF

Dealer North  A K J 2 Reno, Nevada
 K 10 8
 7652
 Q J 9 2  A K 10 8 7 6
 Q 9 5 N  10 7 4 3
 J 7 W E  94
S
 KJ43  Q
 5
 86
 AQ6532
 A 10 9 8

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Forrester Brogeland
1 1 2
3 pass 4 5
dbl 5 all pass

West leads the Q against your diamond game. How will you tackle the play when
East overtakes with the K and switches to the Q?
Boye won with the A and drew trumps with the ace and king. After ruffing
dummy’s last spade and taking a successful finesse of the J, he played the AK,
discarding a club. When he led the 2, East produced the last heart. What would
you do on this trick?
If East had started with 5-4-2-2 shape and QJ, the contract could be made
by ruffing the fourth round of hearts and exiting with a club; East would have to
concede a ruff-and-sluff after winning with the J. Could the clubs lie like that,
though? The red-suit distribution was known from the fall of the cards. The
defenders’ spade bidding and West’s double of 5 made it a near certainty that
East had started with 6-4-2-1 shape. Boye therefore discarded another club on the

22 | Bridge at the Edge

fourth heart, allowing East to win the trick. Like it or not, East had to exit with
a spade. Away went South’s last club and the trick was ruffed in dummy. Eleven
tricks had been made!
No doubt West is still regretting his double of 5. Had he passed instead, it is
at least possible that Forrester would have left it there. It is difficult to avoid two
club losers when clubs are trumps!
We will end the chapter with a deal where Boye had to seek the game-going
trick from one of the black suits. Choose a line of play yourself:

E-W Vul.  9 2006 National Open Teams

Dealer West  8 7 5 2 Canberra, Australia
 8543
 Q962

N
W E
S

 Q 10 7 6
 AKJ96
 A
 A43

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Erichsen Brogeland
1 pass 2 dbl
pass 2NT pass 3
pass 4 all pass

Espen Erichsen’s 2NT was an extension of the Lebensohl convention, suggesting a

hand in the 0-7 point range. On most hands partner would then bid 3, allowing
the 2NT bidder to pass with clubs, or correct to one of the red suits. Here, Boye
was very strong and therefore declined to bid 3. How would you play 4 when
West leads the A and switches to the Q?
When you have decided, look at the full deal:

1 Through the Back of the Cards | 23

  9
 8752
 8543
 Q962
 A K J 5 2  843
 4 3 N  Q 10
 Q J 10 6 W E  K972
S
 10 7  KJ85
 Q 10 7 6
 AKJ96
 A
 A43

West’s first two leads had already revealed good values in spades and diamonds,
so it was quite possible that East held the K. Before relying on a favorable club
position, Boye tried to build a spade trick. He won the diamond switch and led the
Q, covered by the K and ruffed in the dummy.
The AK brought the news of a 2-2 break and Boye now had to read the lie of
the spade suit. If East had begun with J43, a ruff of the 7 would bring down the
J and establish the 10 as the game-going trick. If instead, East had started with
843, Boye would need to lead the 10 to pin the 8. Which should it be?
Boye reasoned that in the dangerous case where East held the K, West might
need the J to make up his opening bid of 1. With only 10 points, he might not
have been willing to open when vulnerable against non-vulnerable. Boye therefore
continued with the 10.
If West had covered with the J, declarer would ruff in the dummy; East’s 8
would be pinned and the 7 would be good. West defended more strongly, playing
low on the 10. Reading the position, Boye threw a club from dummy. He could
then ruff his last spade in dummy for a tenth trick.

24 | Bridge at the Edge

 2
Slam Bidding Mechanics

One of the most important skills in bridge is slam bidding. What methods do you
need to achieve accuracy in this area? A complex relay system, perhaps? A host
of conventions, each targeted at a particular situation? Not at all. As we will see
in this chapter, it is possible to bid a great majority of slams accurately using only
cuebids, Roman Keycard Blackwood (RKCB) and a small number of other gadgets.

Roman Keycard Blackwood

There is sometimes a right and a wrong member of the partnership to use Roman
Keycard Blackwood. When one player has good playing strength, perhaps with a
long side suit, and the other holds the bulk of the controls, it is the first player who
should ask for keycards. Look at this deal:

E-W Vul.  K Q 4 1997 Bermuda Bowl SF

Dealer North  2 Norway - France
 KJ9
 K Q 10 7 6 4
 9 8 3  J7
 5 4 3 N  KQ98
 6 5 4 2 W E  Q 10 8 7 3
S
 853  J2
 A 10 6 5 2
 A J 10 7 6
 A
 A9

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Chemla Brogeland Perron Sælensminde
1 pass 1
pass 2 pass 2
pass 3 pass 4
pass 4NT pass 5
pass 5 pass 6
pass 7 all pass

2 Slam Bidding Mechanics | 25

 Erik Sælensminde’s 2 was an artificial game-force, similar to fourth-suit
forcing. When Boye showed his excellent spade support, it was clear to Erik that a
spade slam was available. Many players would then have bid RKCB on the South
cards but this would be a mistake. Erik preferred to cuebid 4 (a bid of 4 would
have been a slam try in clubs) and Boye could now bid RKCB from his side of the
table.
South’s 5 response showed one or four
Roman Keycard Blackwood keycards. Unlikely as it was that South held
4NT asks for keycards (the
only one keycard, Boye made a disciplined
four aces and the trump king):
sign-off in 5. He knew that his partner would
continue bidding if he had four keycards
5 0 or 3 keycards rather than one. (The situation would have
5 1 or 4 keycards been the same if South had responded 5
5 2 keycards, no trump Q with three keycards instead of zero.) Since
Erik had four keycards, and nothing else to
5 2 keycards + trump Q
show, he raised to 6. Knowing now that he
was facing all four aces, Boye was able to bid
the grand slam. He could visualize five spade tricks, five or six clubs, three winners
in the red suits and perhaps a heart ruff. Tricks to spare!
It may seem an easy grand to reach but let’s see the French auction:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Helgemo Multon Helness Mouiel
1 pass 1
pass 2 pass 3
pass 3 pass 4
pass 4 pass 4NT
pass 5 pass 5
pass 6 pass 6
all pass

Asking for the trump queen Here it was South who bid RKCB. When
A bid in the cheapest non- partner showed the missing key card (the
trump suit asks for the trump K) he bid 5 to ask for the Q. North’s
queen: 6 showed the trump queen and the K.
Mouiel could not be sure of a parking spot
sign-off: no trump queen
for all his heart losers and signed off in 6,
new suit: trump Q + side king Norway gaining 11 IMPs. You can see how
5NT: trump Q and no king. valuable it was for North to bid RKCB rather
than South.

26 | Bridge at the Edge

5NT to ask for side-suit kings
When the 4NT bidder bids 5NT on the next round, this asks for side-suit kings.
In the old days, partner would merely indicate how many such kings he held. It is
better to indicate which king you hold, showing the lower king when you hold two.
Suppose hearts are trumps. A 6 response would show the K and a 6 sign-off
would deny any side-suit king.
There were several instructive points during the bidding of this deal:

Both Vul.  K 8 6 5 4 2003 Four Stars final

Dealer East  10 2 Brighton, England
 KJ76
 62
 9 3  J72
 — N  J9876543
 Q 9 5 3 2 W E  10 4
S
 J 10 9 8 7 5  —
 A Q 10
 AKQ
 A8
 AKQ43

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Sælensminde
3 dbl
pass 4 pass 4NT
pass 5 pass 5NT
pass 6 pass 7NT
all pass

The key bid was Boye’s 4 response to the takeout double. (At the other table
North bid just 3 and South’s 3NT ended the auction.) If South has a minimum
double of 3, he will hold four cards in spades. With five-card spade support and
two useful kings, the North hand is therefore worth a positive move.
Erik Sælensminde asked for keycards.
5NT confirmed that all keycards were held 5NT asking for kings
and asked for specific kings. When Boye Following a RKCB 4NT with
showed the K, Erik could count eleven 5NT asks partner to identify
tricks. Since two extra tricks in either black a side-suit king. Six of the
suit would bring the total to thirteen, he bid trump suit will deny any.
the grand slam in notrump rather than spades. Otherwise he will bid the suit
(Suppose West held J9xx. You would still of his king (the cheaper king
make 7NT if clubs were 3-3.) When the spade if he holds two).
suit broke 3-2, 7NT was easily made.

2 Slam Bidding Mechanics | 27

 At another table, North ended in 7 and West ventured a Lightner Double.
South should surely have headed for 7NT after this warning. No, he stuck his
ground and the defenders scored the first four tricks, cross-ruffing in hearts and
clubs for 1100!
On the deal we have just seen South held two of the three side-suit kings. It
therefore did not matter whether partner’s response to 5NT identified which king
North held or merely stated that he held one unspecified king. On the next deal
Erik Sælensminde needed to know which king, if any, Boye held.

N-S Vul.  K J 10 2007 Bermuda Bowl final

Dealer East  A Q 8 5 Norway - USA
 5
 A Q 10 9 3
 5  743
 K 9 6 N  J 10 7 4 3
 K Q 10 9 8 7 W E  J3
S
 872  J64
 AQ9862
 2
 A642
 K5

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Rosenberg Sælensminde Zia Brogeland
pass 1
3 dbl 4 4
pass 4NT pass 5
pass 5NT pass 6
pass 7 all pass

Boye’s 5 response showed two keycards and the Q. Erik could now visualize a
grand slam if South held the K. He continued with 5NT, asking for specific side-
suit kings and was happy to hear the 6 response. Six spade tricks, three top clubs
and the red aces would add up to eleven. A diamond ruff or two, not to mention
extra club tricks, would surely carry the total to thirteen. He bid 7, as did Katz
and Jacobs at the other table, and the contract was easily made.
Suppose Boye’s response to the 5NT enquiry had been 6, showing that he
held the K but not the K. North would then be nowhere near to counting
thirteen tricks; he would have signed off in 6. How about a 6 response? The K
would not be quite as useful as the K because the prospect of extra tricks would
be slightly less in that suit. It would still be a good bet to bid the grand slam. Two
diamond ruffs, or one ruff and a seventh spade, would again bring the total to
thirteen.

28 | Bridge at the Edge

Italian cuebids
A few decades back, players made a cuebid only when they held the ace (or void)
in the bid suit. ‘Otherwise you might end in a slam with two aces missing!’ they
would say. The Italian Blue team was happy to cuebid on aces, kings, singletons
and voids. A big advantage of this method was that a player denied any control
in a suit that he bypassed when cuebidding. It became easier to identify when
the defenders had two cashable winners in a side suit. On most auctions you can
follow such cuebids with 4NT, to check that two aces are not missing.
The bidding on the next deal contains two cuebids, both made on shortages:

Neither Vul.  J 9 6 2 2006 Norwegian Teams

Dealer West  Q J 10 4 Kristiansand
 6
 J832
 10 7  53
 K 9 5 2 N  63
 9 7 5 2 W E  A 10 3
S
 KQ5  A 10 9 7 6 4
 AKQ84
 A87
 KQJ84
 —

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Helgemo T.Brogeland Helness B.Brogeland
pass pass pass 2
pass 2 pass 2
pass 3 pass 4
pass 4 pass 6
pass 6 all pass

Boye offered partner a choice of slams by Italian Cuebids

bidding 6. If partner’s diamond cuebid
When trumps are agreed, a
was based on the A and he held only three
bid in a new suit (usually at the
low spades, it was possible that diamonds
four-level or higher) is a cuebid,
would be a safer slam. How would you play
showing interest in a slam. In
6 when Geir Helgemo leads the K?
the popular method known
Boye ruffed the club lead and played
as Italian cuebids, such a bid
the ace and jack of trumps, pleased to see
shows the ace or king of the suit,
a 2-2 break. When he led dummy’s 6,
sometimes a singleton or void.
Tor Helness defended strongly by following
When a suit is bypassed, the
smoothly with a low card. (If he rose with
bidder shows no control there.
the ace, declarer could throw three hearts

2 Slam Bidding Mechanics | 29

from dummy on the established diamonds. He would then ruff two hearts in
dummy to bring the total to twelve.) Boye won with the K and ruffed a diamond.
Now came the first big chance of making the contract — the heart finesse. He ran
the Q, losing to West’s K. Boye ruffed the club return and now had to establish
the diamonds with only one trump left in dummy. Should he lead the Q for a
ruffing finesse through West or try to ruff down an original Axx with East?
East was more likely to have held up the A than West, who was sitting over
declarer’s honors. A bigger clue was available. West had declined to open the
bidding and had already shown up with the K and KQ! Boye ruffed a diamond
in dummy and — lo and behold — the A fell from East. Twelve tricks were his.
In slam auctions a problem may be caused by the fact that the control-showing
cuebid has to fulfill two roles. It shows a control in the suit bid, yes, but it is also
used to tell partner that your hand is suitable for a slam. Do you see why this can
cause a problem? If you show a control when your hand is minimum, partner may
assume that you have a strong hand. If you do not show the control, he may think
there is no control in that suit.
The next deal illustrates one aspect of this dilemma. South does not have a
particularly useful hand but he does hold a key control in hearts.

E-W Vul.  A K Q 7 2003 Bermuda Bowl QF

Dealer North  K 10 3 Norway-Bulgaria
 AK987
 3
 8 6  J54
 Q 6 2 N  8754
 6 5 4 3 2 W E  J
S
 QJ7  A 10 9 6 5
 10 9 3 2
 AJ9
 Q 10
 K842

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Karaivanov Brogeland Trendafilov Sælensminde
1 pass 1
pass 4 pass 4
pass 4NT pass 5
pass 6 all pass

How should South react to North’s splinter bid of 4? Some players would mutter
to themselves: ‘My K is wasted opposite the splinter bid and that leaves me with a
virtual 7-count. I have poor trumps too, so I am going to sign off in 4.’

30 | Bridge at the Edge

 There are several reasons why this would be a wrong assessment. Firstly, it
is generally right to cuebid an ace when you will not be raising the level of the
contract. Here you can cuebid 4 without carrying the bidding past the game-level.
If you held the K instead, you would be entitled to decline to cuebid in the suit.
Secondly, your Q may well prove to be a precious card, filling out partner’s main
suit. Thirdly, your K is not necessarily a wasted value because it may provide a
discard from partner’s hand if East holds the A.
Erik Sælensminde did cuebid 4 and this was encouragement enough for Boye
to bid the slam via RKCB. As you see, the Q was a very useful card in the play.
On some lies of the cards the K would have been useful too, providing a heart
discard.

Redoubling a cuebid
When you cuebid, alert opponents may take advantage by doubling to suggest a
good opening lead. This is not a one-way gain for them since you or your partner
will then have the chance to redouble. The meaning of such an action depends on
which player redoubles. Look at this deal first:

N-S Vul.  7 5 2010 Vanderbilt

Dealer North  A 10 7 4 Lynch - Strul
 KJ75
 A 10 9
 8 4 3 2  J9
 K Q 5 N  J962
 10 6 4 W E  83
S
 Q32  KJ875
 A K Q 10 6
 83
 AQ92
 64

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Grøtheim Brogeland Gromov Sælensminde
1 pass 1
pass 1NT pass 2
pass 2 pass 3
pass 3 pass 4
pass 5 dbl pass
pass rdbl pass 6
all pass

2 Slam Bidding Mechanics | 31

 The 1NT rebid showed 12-14 points and
Redoubling a cuebid Erik Sælensminde’s 2 was a game-forcing
When your partner’s cuebid check-back bid. South’s subsequent leap
has been doubled, during a to 4 showed an excellent suit and was a
slam auction, you can pass suggestion to play there. Boye did not pass,
to allow him to define his bid however. He knew that his partner would
more closely. A redouble will not have introduced his diamond support
indicate first-round control unless there was at least some chance of
(ace or void). Any other a high contract in that suit. Since he held
continuation will imply that three keycards in a hand limited by the
the control was second-round weak notrump rebid, it was clear to take one
(king or singleton). When more look at a diamond slam. When Boye
you hold first-round control cuebid 5, East doubled for a lead. Two
in that suit, you can redouble passes followed and Boye then redoubled, to
yourself. tell partner that he held first-round (rather
than second-round) control of the club suit.
This was enough to persuade Erik to bid the
successful 6. If Boye had denied first-round club control, by bidding 5 instead
of redoubling, this would have ended the auction.
Let’s see an example of a redouble by the other player, the cuebidder’s partner:

Both Vul.  A 4 2000 Olympiad QF

Dealer East  K Q 9 8 7 4 Norway - England
 6543
 5
 7 6 3 2  Q85
 J 3 2 N  10 5
 K W E  J92
S
 K8762  Q J 10 9 3
 K J 10 9
 A6
 A Q 10 8 7
 A4

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Liggins Sælensminde Fawcett Brogeland
pass 1
pass 1 pass 2
pass 3 pass 3NT
pass 4 dbl rdbl
pass 4NT pass 5
pass 6 all pass

32 | Bridge at the Edge

 Erik Sælensminde was still interested in a diamond slam over partner’s 3NT.
His bid of 4 was more informative than 4 would have been, telling partner of his
club control. When Fawcett made a lead-directing double of 4 Boye redoubled
to show his first-round control. Roman Keycard Blackwood then led to the par
contract of 6. How would you play the slam when West leads the 6?
After winning the club lead, Boye made the safety play of cashing the A. This
gave up the best chance of picking up the trumps without loss but it avoided the
unpleasant second-round guess that would arise if a finesse of the Q lost to the
K. Cashing the ace first does not cost you anything if East holds KJx because you
can lead towards the Q on the next round.

5NT tells partner all the keycards are present

When you use 5NT to ask for side-suit kings, the contract is already destined for
the six-level, at least. The intention behind 5NT is to investigate a grand slam and
this implies that all six keycards must be present. When the responder has an
unannounced source of extra tricks, he may take up the reins and jump directly to
a grand slam. That is what happened on this deal:

Both Vul.  7 5 4 3 1997 World Jr Championship

Dealer North  A K 7 Norway - Canada
 J
 AK543
 J 8  10 2
 Q 9 N  J 10 4 3 2
W
 10 9 6 5 4 3 2 E  KQ
S
 Q2  10 9 8 6
 AKQ96
 865
 A87
 J7

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Piafsky Saur Nadler Brogeland
1 pass 1
pass 3 pass 4
pass 4 pass 4NT
pass 5 pass 5NT
pass 7 all pass

Since a rebid of 2 from North would be natural and forcing (a reverse), 3 becomes
available as a mini-splinter. In other words, it shows a raise to 3 that includes at
most one card in diamonds.

2 Slam Bidding Mechanics | 33

 With excellent trumps and the ace opposite partner’s singleton, Boye showed
slam interest with a cuebid of 4. Not only did this show the A (he would not
cuebid the K opposite a known shortage), it also denied a first- or second-round
control in both hearts and clubs. North’s 4 therefore promised a control in clubs
as well as hearts.
Boye continued with RKCB, revealing that North held the two missing aces.
His 5NT continuation asked for side-suit kings and also carried this important
meaning: ‘We hold all the keycards (the four aces and the trump king-queen); feel
free to bid a grand if you have a source of tricks.’
Øyvind Saur now had no need to worry about his seven-high trumps. He
held both the missing side-suit kings and there was a good chance that the clubs
would provide some extra tricks. He leapt to 7, which was easily made. (Two
diamonds were ruffed in dummy and the thirteenth club provided a discard for the
heart loser.)

Seeking the queen of a side suit

Now we will look at another way to investigate a grand slam, following Roman
Keycard Blackwood. Below the level of six of the trump suit, you bid a side suit
where you are looking for a supporting queen.

N-S Vul.  A K 6 1997 Bermuda Bowl play-off

Dealer East  Q 10 4 3 Norway - USA
 AK862
 A
 J 10 2  98743
 9 6 2 N  J
 J 4 3 W E  10 7 5
S
 J984  K Q 10 3
 Q5
 AK875
 Q9
 7652

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Rosenberg Brogeland Zia Sælensminde
pass 1
pass 2NT pass 3
pass 3NT pass 4
pass 4NT pass 5
pass 6 pass 7
all pass

34 | Bridge at the Edge

Boye responded with Jacoby 2NT and Erik’s 3 showed a minimum hand. 3NT
asked for cuebids and 4NT was RKCB, discovering that South held the AK. Boye
decided that the Q in partner’s hand would be enough for a grand slam. He
passed this message by bidding 6. Holding the precious Q, Erik duly bid 7 and
the contract was easily made.
At the other table the Norwegian East-West disrupted proceedings with an
opening bid on the East cards:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Aa Deutsch Grøtheim Soloway
2 pass
3 3NT all pass

Glenn Grøtheim’s 2 opening showed a weak hand containing a major suit of at

least four cards. West could tell that North-South almost certainly had a slam
somewhere. He responded with a pre-emptive 3, asking to play in partner’s suit
at the three-level. This posed quite a problem for Seymon Deutsch in the North
seat. Who can blame him for bidding 3NT? This ended the auction and Norway
gained 16 IMPs.

Pick-a-slam 5NT
On the next deal heavy bidding from the opponents left Boye short of space to
investigate the best slam.

Neither Vul.  Q 2 2009 Norway Premier League

Dealer East  A 10 7 North Trøndelag -
 7 4 Middle Trøndelag
 A Q 10 9 4 2
 J 8 6 3  K9754
 8 4 N  J63
 Q 6 3 W E  J952
S
 J875  6
 A 10
 KQ952
 A K 10 8
 K3

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Livgård Brogeland Eide Lindqvist
2 dbl
rdbl pass 2 3
4 5NT pass 6
pass 6 all pass

2 Slam Bidding Mechanics | 35

 East opened with a ‘weak multi’. Espen Lindqvist doubled and West redoubled,
asking partner to show his suit. Boye had no good bid to make on the first round.
When the bidding returned to him, the opponents had climbed all the way to 4.
What could he bid now?
It was not the moment to worry about whether partner held a spade control.
For one thing, there was a fair chance that East-West held ten spades between
them. Boye chose a ‘pick-a-slam’ 5NT, just in case partner held a side suit of clubs,
and the auction came to a halt in 6.
Allan Livgård led the 6 and Lindqvist misguessed; he rose with dummy’s Q,
covered by the king and ace. How would you continue?
Lindqvist played all five rounds of trumps and continued with the K and A,
East showing out on the second round. West’s remaining cards were: J Q6 J8.
Lindqvist played the AK and threw West in with the J to give two club tricks to
the dummy. A neat recovery!
The pick-a-slam 5NT is a valuable convention, worthy of another example.
Boye sat North on this deal:

E-W Vul.  K 3 2 2005 Icelandair Open

Dealer North  A Q 8 4 3 Reykjavik
 J 10
 A 10 8
 Q 8 7 6 4  J 10 5
 K 10 5 N  J972
 9 4 W E  A73
S
 J63  975
 A9
 6
 KQ8652
 KQ42

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Sælensminde
1NT pass 2
pass 2 pass 3
pass 3NT pass 4
pass 5NT pass 6
all pass

Boye and Erik frequently upgrade a good 14-point hand to a 15-17 point 1NT
opening. The North hand merited such treatment, with its strong five-card suit,
two aces and two tens. Erik’s 3 was a natural slam try and Boye signed off in 3NT.
When Erik persisted with 4, showing a second suit, Boye was willing to play at
the slam level. Uncertain which minor would make the better trump suit, he bid a

36 | Bridge at the Edge

pick-a-slam 5NT. Holding six diamonds and only four clubs, it was easy for Erik
to bid 6.
There was some interest in the play, although the favorable lie of the cards
meant that any line would succeed. Erik won the spade lead with the ace and
played a trump to the ten and ace. After winning the spade continuation with the
king, he played the J. He then reached his hand with the K and played three
more rounds of trumps. When he crossed to the A, no J appeared. A third
round of clubs to the queen revealed the 3-3 break, so no heart finesse (or heart-
club squeeze) was required.

Exclusion Blackwood
How can you ask for keycards when you have a void in your hand? The answer
is to use Exclusion Blackwood. By bidding a suit at the five-level (instead of 4NT)
you show a void and ask partner for keycards not including the ace of your void
suit. Boye and Erik used that method here:

E-W Vul.  K J 6 4 3 2000 Bermuda Bowl SF

Dealer East  K Q 8 5 Norway - Brazil
 10 9 6
 8
 A 8 5  972
 J 10 4 2 N  A9763
 J 7 W E  84
S
 10 5 4 2  976
 Q 10
 —
 AKQ532
 AKQJ3

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Chagas Brogeland Branco Sælensminde
pass 2
pass 2 pass 3
pass 4 pass 5
pass 5 pass 6
all pass

Diamonds were agreed as trumps and Erik’s leap to 5 carried the message: ‘I have
a heart void. How many keycards do you hold outside hearts?’ If Boye had shown
one keycard (5NT, showing the A), a further keycard enquiry of 6 would have
allowed Erik to locate a possible K in the North hand and bid the grand slam. As
it was, Boye denied the A and the bidding came to a halt in 6.

2 Slam Bidding Mechanics | 37

 3
Rescue Operations

One good measure of a bridge player is how he or she reacts when things go wrong.
Perhaps the auction goes adrift and the final contract is a dubious one. Maybe the
trump suit or a key side suit breaks badly. In this chapter we will see how a skilful
declarer can sometimes manage to survive such hostile circumstances.
We start with an early memory from Boye’s bridge career, a 6NT contract that
led to a pretty end position:

Neither Vul.  5 4 1993 Arendal tournament

Dealer South  7 3 Norway
 KQ9765
 Q84
 10 3  K9876
 10 9 2 N  8654
 J 8 4 3 W E  2
S
 AJ96  532
 AQJ2
 AKQJ
 A 10
 K 10 7

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Kristiansen Brogeland
2
pass 2 pass 3NT
pass 6NT all pass

West led the 10, won in the South hand. When Boye played the A and K, the
4-1 break came to light. How would you have attempted to rescue the situation?

3 Rescue Operations | 39
 Boye finessed the Q successfully and cashed three more heart tricks, West
throwing a club. These cards were left:

 5
 —
 Q9
 Q84
 10  K98
 — N  —
 J 8 W E  —
S
 AJ9  532
 AJ2
 —
 —
 K 10 7

A club to the queen at this stage, followed by a second spade finesse, would produce
only eleven tricks. Instead, Boye led the K. West won with the A and could not
safely play a diamond or a club. When he chose to exit with the 10, Boye won
with the J and played the A to squeeze West in the minor suits.
Sometimes a contract seems impregnable until you draw the first round of
trumps. An opponent shows out and you then have to make fresh plans. That was
the case on this spade game:

Neither Vul.  10 8 7 4 2008 European Championship

Dealer East  A54 Norway - Portugal
 KQ43
 84
 J 9 5 3  —
 3 N  K Q 10 9 8 6
 J 7 6 2 W E  10 8 5
S
 AQ73  9652
 AKQ62
 J72
 A9
 K J 10

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Barbosa Lindqvist Pinto Brogeland
3 3
pass 4 all pass

Juliano Barbosa was able to lead a heart, despite East’s three-bid, and a useful
dummy hit the table. Unless trumps broke 4-0, a heart could be thrown on the

40 | Bridge at the Edge

third diamond winner and there would be at most three losers: two clubs and a
heart. Boye won the first trick with dummy’s A and played a trump to the ace,
East discarding a heart. How would you continue after this piece of bad news?
With apparently certain losers in both trumps and hearts, it may seem that
you will need East to hold the Q (he is unlikely to have opened 3 with a void
spade and the A). Boye saw that he had nothing to lose by playing four rounds
of diamonds, hoping that West held four cards in the suit. The Portuguese West
duly won the fourth diamond as Boye discarded both his remaining hearts. West
now had to choose a black-suit exit. Judging that South was likely to hold the K,
he exited with a trump, conceding a trick in that suit. This would have beaten the
contract if East held J10xx, since West could draw a further round of trumps each
time a round of clubs was conceded. Boye’s clubs were robust enough to survive
this well-intentioned defense and the spade game was made. Only five out of
fourteen declarers in the open event managed to make the spade game.
Suppose that Boye’s diamond play had misfired, with East holding four
diamonds. He would still have been able to make the contract if East held the Q.
For example, he can discard his last heart on the fourth round of diamonds, ruff
the K high and continue with queen and another trump. If West rose with the J
and exited to dummy’s 10, this would squeeze East. Needing to retain the Q to
guard against North’s 5, he would have to reduce to Qx and a single club finesse
would then suffice.
It is rare to see a 3 contract in a bridge book, so you may now consider
yourself privileged indeed to witness back-to-back 3 contracts! Boye ended in the
wrong trump suit on the first one:

E-W Vul.  A Q 10 8 4 2002 Cap Gemini Invitation

Dealer South  K Q 8 6 The Hague, Netherlands
 A85
 K
 K J 9 6 3  75
 J 5 4 N  A3
 K 6 4 3 W E  97
S
 4  A Q J 10 8 6 3
 2
 10 9 7 2
 Q J 10 2
 9752

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
pass
pass 1 3 pass
pass dbl pass 3
all pass

3 Rescue Operations | 41
 Would you bid 3 or 3 on Boye’s cards? North would have re-opened with a
double with his red-suit lengths reversed, so it seems very much a guess. West led
his singleton club to East’s A and back came the Q. Fortunately for Boye, West
did not find the best discard on this — he threw the 4 instead of a spade. How
would you continue the play from this point?
Boye ruffed in the dummy and led the K to East’s ace, unblocking the 9 from
his hand. The heart return went to West’s jack and dummy’s queen. Prospects were
still poor but Boye soldiered on with ace and another diamond, West winning the
queen with the king. These cards remained:

 A Q 10 8 4
 86
 —
 —
 K J 9 6 3  75
 — N  —
 6 4 W E  —
S
 —  J 10 8 6 3
 2
 10 7
 J 10
 97

West exited with a low spade and Boye had to calculate which card to play from
dummy. He needed six out of the last seven tricks and had no side-suit entry to
the South hand to draw West’s trumps. With a trump trick to be lost, he calculated
that he would have to score two trumps, one heart, and three spade tricks! ‘Ten of
spades, please, partner.’
Dummy’s 10 won the trick. Boye reached his hand with a spade ruff and
played his last trump, throwing a spade from dummy. When he turned to his
heart winners, West could discard on the 10 but then had to ruff the second
heart (otherwise Boye would reach dummy with the 8 and score the A for his
ninth trick). On lead with only the KJ9 remaining, West had to lead a spade into
dummy’s AQ and the contract was made.
Before we move to the next deal, think back to the moment when Boye
unblocked the 9 from his hand. Had he retained the 109 as his last two hearts,
West could have discarded spades on the hearts. Declarer would be unable to
reach the A and the defenders would score a club and West’s last trump to beat
the contract!
The second 3 contract comes from the world’s top individual event — a type
of tournament where the contestants change partners every few boards. How
would you have tackled this one?

42 | Bridge at the Edge

 Both Vul.  Q 8 5 2004 Generali Individual
Dealer East  10 7 6 2 Verona, Italy
 A95
 843
 3 2  A 10 9 4
 J 9 8 5 3 N  K4
 10 6 W E  Q83
S
 A952  K J 10 7
 KJ76
 AQ
 KJ742
 Q6

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland
1 1
1 2 pass pass
3 pass pass 3
all pass

West led the 3 and Boye captured East’s 9 with the K. What would you have
done next?
Boye could be fairly sure from the bidding that West’s distribution was
2-5-2-4. (The spade lead could not be a singleton or East would have opened 1.)
The percentage play in trumps, looking at the suit in isolation, was to cross to the
ace and finesse the jack. Even if he managed to pick up the trump suit, however,
there would still be a danger of losing two spades, two clubs and one heart (because
there would be no entry to dummy to take the heart finesse).
Boye decided to take the second-best line in trumps, playing the king and
ace. If West’s doubleton trump included the queen, he would not only pick up the
trump suit but also end in dummy to finesse the Q. Sadly, the Q did not fall and
prospects looked bleak. Would you have seen any chance to rescue the situation?
Unwilling to give up, Boye called for the 8. East, who could have scuttled the
contract by covering with the 10, played low. Boye did the same and dummy’s 8
won the trick! Since he was still in dummy, he was able to take a successful heart
finesse. The contract was his.
Perhaps you are unimpressed by this and are muttering to yourself that any
respectable East player would have seen the need to cover the 8. Oh yes? East
was Italy’s multiple world champion, Norberto Bocchi!
Prospects did look good initially on our next deal, a borderline club slam. A
closer look revealed that there was more than one way to rescue the slam contract.

3 Rescue Operations | 43
 N-S Vul.  J43 2002 Norwegian Championship
Dealer East  10 9 6 4 Heimdal - Bergen
 KQ4
 KQ9
 9 2  Q 10 8 6
 J 5 3 N  Q87
 J 8 7 5 3 W E  A962
S
 876  10 5
 AK75
 AK2
 10
 AJ432

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
pass 1
pass 1 pass 2
pass 3 pass 3
pass 4NT pass 5
pass 6 all pass

How do you rate your chances when the 3 is led?

If dummy’s K is won by East’s A, you will have a discard for your heart loser
on the Q. The only chance of avoiding a spade loser will be for the Q to fall in
two rounds. You would still need to make plans for your fourth spade — either by
discarding it on the thirteenth heart, or by ruffing it if the defender with the Qx
held only two trumps. Not so promising. Can you see a better chance?
Boye saw that he had little to lose by playing the 4 from dummy on the first
trick. If the lead was from the J, East would have to put on his ace. If instead
East held the AJ and played the jack, declarer would still be able to set up one
diamond trick by taking a ruffing finesse later. When Boye played a low diamond
from dummy, East won with the A and switched to a low heart. What now?
Boye won with the A, played the A and tested the spades by playing the ace
and king. If the Q had fallen doubleton, there would have been twelve easy tricks.
Only spot cards appeared, however. Boye cashed the K, everyone following, and
crossed to dummy with the Q. He then discarded a heart on the K and ruffed
a heart high. Hearts were 3-3! He returned to dummy with the K and discarded
both his spade losers, one on the Q and the other on the thirteenth heart.
On the next deal a finesse for the K seemed to be a 99% shot after East’s
opening bid. Yes, but the favorite does not always romp home.

44 | Bridge at the Edge

 Neither Vul.  7 4 3 2006 Icelandair Open
Dealer North  J 7 6 4 Reykjavik
 952
 Q 10 9
 Q 9  A 10 6 5 2
 10 9 5 2 N  AQ3
 K 6 W E  10 8 7 3
S
 86532  4
 KJ8
 K8
 AQJ4
 AKJ7

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Gillis Brogeland
pass 1 dbl
pass 2 pass 3NT
all pass

Boye won the Q lead with the K and crossed to the 10 to take the ‘marked
finesse’ in diamonds. Not so marked on this occasion — East had opened on only
10 points and the finesse lost to the king. East won the spade continuation with the
ace and cleared the spade suit. How would you play from this point?
Boye cashed one more round of diamonds, to see if the 10 would fall. To
play another round of diamonds, hoping for a 3-3 break, would result in defeat.
Instead, Boye switched back to the club suit. This was the position with one club
still to be played:
—
 J764
 9
 —
 —  10 6
 10 9 5 2 N  A
 — W E  10 8
S
 8  —
 —
 K8
 J4
 K

Boye led the K, throwing dummy’s 4, and East was squeezed in three suits. To
retain his diamond guard, he had to discard a spade winner. No guess was now
required. Boye played the 8 to the bare A and discarded the 4 when East

3 Rescue Operations | 45
cashed his remaining spade. East had to exit with a diamond and the J and K
scored the last two tricks for declarer.
Moving on, we look at a deal where bad red-suit breaks put 3NT at risk.

Both Vul.  Q 9 6 2003 Vanderbilt, Round 3

Dealer South  A J 7 6 4 Philadelphia
 J6
 10 4 3
 A 8 7 4 3 2  J 10
 8 N  Q532
 10 9 8 7 W E  A5
S
 K9  Q7652
 K5
 K 10 9
 KQ432
 AJ8

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Chambers Forrester Schermer Brogeland
1NT
2 3NT all pass

Boye won the spade lead with the king and played a diamond to the jack. East won
with the ace and returned a spade, West winning with the ace and clearing the suit.
On the third round of spades, both East and South discarded a club. How would
you have continued the play from this point?
Boye crossed to his K and ran the 10 into the safe East hand. If East had
won, everything would have been easy. No, this was the Vanderbilt and East
withheld the Q. When the 9 was run next, West threw a spade and East again
held up the queen, hoping to restrict declarer to three heart tricks.
Thwarted in the heart suit, Boye played the Q next. The suit failed to divide
3-3, East discarding a club, and these cards remained:

—
 AJ7
 —
 10 4
 8 7  —
 — N  Q5
 10 W E  —
S
 K9  Q76
 —
 K
 43
 AJ

46 | Bridge at the Edge

The tide turned when Boye played the K. What card could West afford? Not a
diamond, clearly. If he threw a spade winner instead, declarer would be able to set
up a diamond trick, winning the last two tricks with the A and 4. West therefore
had to throw the 9.
There was no future in setting up a ninth trick in diamonds now but Boye
turned his attention to the other defender, continuing with the A and J. East
won with the Q and scored a second club trick. Then, at Trick 13, he had to lead
a heart to dummy’s stranded ace. After a fine effort by all the players the game had
been landed.
On the next deal the defenders had a chance to beat Boye as he tried to rescue
an apparently doomed 3NT contract. See if you can spot the defenders’ mistake as
the play is described.

Both Vul.  A 2 2001 Bermuda Bowl final

Dealer West  J 9 7 Norway - USA
 J9
 KJ7654
 10 6 5  KQ8
 Q 10 4 3 N  A82
 10 6 5 4 W E  Q83
S
 10 9  Q832
 J9743
 K65
 AK72
 A

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sontag Sælensminde Weichsel Brogeland
pass 1 pass 1
pass 2 pass 2
pass 3 pass 3NT
all pass

At the other table, the USA North passed and Tor Helness opened 1 on the East
cards. Lew Stansby (South) came to rest in 2, just making for +110. A large
number of IMPs were available if Boye could somehow make nine tricks in his
unlikely looking notrump game.
Alan Sontag led the 3 to partner’s ace and Peter Weichsel returned the 8 to
West’s Q. There was little point in clearing the heart suit and West switched to the
10, won by East with his Q. How would you have tried to give yourself a chance
in 3NT when East returns the 8 to dummy’s bare ace?

3 Rescue Operations | 47
 Boye crossed to the A and cashed the K, stripping East of his safe exit card
in that suit. He then led the J to East’s K. Weichsel, sitting East, had to find the
best return in this end position:

— 
— 
J9 
KJ76 
 —  —
 10 N  —
 10 6 5 4 W E  Q83
S
 10  Q83
 97
 —
 AK72
 —

A club into dummy’s KJ did not look very inviting, so Weichsel returned a low
diamond. Boye ran this successfully to dummy’s J and discarded his remaining
low diamond on the K. His hand was then high — two spades and two diamonds
— and the game was made.
Did you spot how the defense could have done better? In the six-card end
position shown, East must exit with the Q rather than a low diamond. Declarer
can win with the A, cash two spades and cross to the J to score the K. He
would then have to surrender the last trick to East’s Q for one down.
Boye faced two problems on the next deal. The trump suit was somewhat
inadequate and the defenders were threatening to score a club ruff. No genie in a
bottle was available for assistance, so he had to rescue the situation himself.

E-W Vul.  A Q 10 2000 Norwegian

Dealer East  10 3 Premier League
 A4
 AKJ862
 J 8 4  K63
 A Q J 9 6 5 2 N  K84
 10 7 W E  Q952
S
 4  10 9 3
 9752
 7
 KJ863
 Q75

48 | Bridge at the Edge

 WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH
Sælensminde Brogeland
pass pass
3 dbl pass 3
pass 4 all pass

How would you play the spade game when West leads the 4?
Let’s see first what happened at the other table, after the same lead. Declarer
won with the Q and finessed the Q, losing to the K. West ruffed the 10
return and underled the A to put East on lead for a second club ruff. That was
one down.
Boye won the club lead in the dummy and led a heart, breaking the link
between the two defenders. East rose with the K and gave his partner a club
ruff. West then tried to cash the A but Boye ruffed in his hand. A trump to the
queen now would result in a second ruff, but Boye played a trump to the ace. He
then returned to his hand with the K to lead a second round of trumps. This line
would succeed whether West had started with K84 or J84. As the cards lay, the
jack, queen and king appeared on the second round of trumps. Boye ruffed the
heart return with the 9 and crossed to the A to draw East’s last trump. Dummy
was then high.
Boye reached a fairly awful slam on the deal below. West breathed some life
into the contract with a helpful opening lead but there was still some work to do.
How would you have played it?

Both Vul.  K J 9 2003 Icelandair Open

Dealer North  K 5 4 3 Reykjavik
 K653
 A 10
 5  862
 A J 7 6 N  10 8 2
 J 10 9 8 W E  Q72
S
 9654  KJ87
 A Q 10 7 4 3
 Q9
 A4
 Q32

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Zia Brogeland
1 pass 2
pass 3 pass 4
pass 6 all pass

3 Rescue Operations | 49
 The Icelandic West led the A and down went the dummy. On any other lead
prospects would have been dismal indeed. How would you take advantage of this
favorable start when West switches to the 5 at Trick 2?
There was no reason whatsoever to think that West would switch away from
the K. Boye rose with the A and drew two rounds of trumps with the ace and
queen, West showing out on the second round. He cashed the Q, crossed to
dummy with a third round of trumps and discarded a club on the K.
Do you see the ending that Boye had in mind? Only one defender guarded
the fourth round of hearts; only one defender held a guard against South’s Q. If
West held the J and East held the K, neither defender would be able to retain a
diamond guard when the remaining trumps were run.
Boye returned to his hand with the A and played two more rounds of trumps.
These cards were still to be played:

 —
 5
 K6
 —
 —  —
 J N  —
 J 10 W E  Q7
S
 —  K
 4
 —
 4
 Q

This is the classic matrix of the double squeeze. When the 4 was led, West had
to release the 10 to retain his heart guard. The 5 was thrown from dummy and
East was caught in a similar dilemma. Whether he threw the K or a diamond,
declarer would have his twelfth trick.
‘You played it well,’ said Zia. ‘But next time, please, another king for your 2
bid!’

50 | Bridge at the Edge

 4
There’s No Justice!

In this chapter we will look at some championship deals where good play or good
bidding was not rewarded on the scorecard. While this may seem unfair at the
time, many people regard bridge as containing the perfect balance between skill
and luck.
On the first deal Erik Sælensminde was in 3NT and had to calculate the best
play to bring in dummy’s long diamond suit.

Both Vul.  10 7 3 2001 Bermuda Bowl final

Dealer West  — Norway - USA 2
 KQ98764
 A93
 Q 9 6 5 2  84
 J 6 3 N  AQ97
 A 5 2 W E  J 10
S
 42  K 10 8 7 5
 AKJ
 K 10 8 5 4 2
 3
 QJ6

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Meltzer Brogeland Larsen Sælensminde
pass 1 pass 1
pass 2 pass 3
pass 3 pass 3NT
all pass

Rose Meltzer led the 5, Sælensminde winning with the J. When a diamond was
played to dummy’s king, West followed with the 2 and East with the 10. What
play should you make on the next round of diamonds?
Perhaps you think that it is obvious to continue with the Q, pinning East’s
J. In a typical club game you might well be right. In a world final, however, you
can expect East to falsecard an honor from J10x. Indeed, if he fails to do so you

4 There’s No Justice! | 51
would have no guess in the suit; your only chance would be to lead a low card on
the second round and this would bring down West’s bare A.
Suppose East plays the 10 and you continue with a low diamond on the
second round; you will make the contract when East began with J102 or J105
(two combinations). If instead you continue with the Q, you will succeed only
when East holds J10 (one combination). Sælensminde duly continued with a low
diamond — the percentage play. No justice on this occasion! East’s J won the
trick and the game went three down.
The diamond situation is an example of the Principle of Restricted Choice.
If West holds A5 or A2, she has no choice with her play; she must contribute
the low card on the first round. From a holding of A52, she can choose which
spotcard to play. Restricted Choice states that it is more likely that a card was
played because its owner had no choice than that the card was chosen from equals.
When you have two possible trump suits available — one a 5-4 fit, the other
a 4-4 fit — it is not always easy to decide which to choose. How would you and
your partner have bid these hands?

N-S Vul.  A 10 8 2005 Hecht Cup

Dealer East  A Q J 10 7 Copenhagen, Denmark
 7
 J 10 9 2
 Q J 4  9 632
 6 4 N  9 5
 J 9 6 4 3 2 W E  K Q 10 8
S
 63  K 85
 K75
 K832
 A5
 AQ74

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Sælensminde
pass 1NT
pass 2 dbl 3
4 6 all pass

Boye’s 2 was a standard transfer bid, showing at least five hearts, and East’s double
showed something good in diamonds. Erik’s transfer break to 3 showed a useful
heart fit and a strong four-card suit in clubs. West preempted in diamonds and
Boye then bid a small slam in clubs.
Do you see what an excellent contract 6 is? Even if the club finesse loses, you
can discard your spade loser on the fifth round of hearts and make the slam. No
fewer than 14 pairs in this event bid the small slam in hearts instead, a contract that

52 | Bridge at the Edge

would fail if West held the K. There’s no justice! East held the K and the heart
slam rolled home. The few virtuous pairs who had bid the better contract of 6
paid out a few IMPs instead of gaining a large bundle.
On the next deal Boye and Zia Mahmood turned a blind eye to their 5-3 spade
fit, preferring to play in notrump with a diamond holding of single J opposite
765. Would you expect this to result in a great score — after a diamond lead? You
never know. Let’s take a look.

E-W Vul.  10 9 8 6 4 2003 Icelandair Open Pairs

Dealer East  A 8 Reykjavik
 J
 K Q J 10 4
 Q 7 5 2  3
 3 N  K6542
W
 Q 10 9 8 4 3 2 E  AK
S
 3  A9876
 AKJ
 Q J 10 9 7
 765
 52

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Zia
1 pass
1 2 pass 2NT
all pass

West led the 10 and Zia did not like the look of dummy. East scored the two top
honors in the suit and switched to the 3. Zia perked up a bit at this reprieve.
He won with the A and played a club to the king. East ducked the first round
of clubs and won the second. He then exited with the 9, won in the dummy as
West showed out.
Zia’s next move was to lead dummy’s 8, which East does best to duck.
Declarer would still arrive at eight tricks, since East would have to give him a third
heart trick at the end. East decided to win with the K. Zia won the club return,
discarding the J. He then unblocked the A and crossed to the K to enjoy
three more heart tricks. That was +150 and a matchpoint score of 114 out of 130,
contributing to an eventual win in the event.
Suppose the Q and K had been swapped on that last deal. The bidding would
have been just the same but the defenders would have scored seven diamonds, one
heart and one club. Four down!
Boye found a great defensive play on the next deal. The opponents had stayed
low, however, so only overtricks were at stake.

4 There’s No Justice! | 53
 Both Vul.  Q 7 2010 Vanderbilt
Dealer West  K Q 10 9 Reno, Nevada
 KJ752
 94
 J 9 5 4 2  K863
 — N  8765
 Q 8 4 3 W E  6
S
 J865  KQ73
 A 10
 AJ432
 A 10 9
 A 10 2

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Helness Sælensminde Helgemo
pass pass pass 1
pass 2 dbl 4
all pass

North’s 2 was Drury, showing a good heart raise, and East’s double was lead-
directing. Playing third and fifth leads, Boye led the 6 to the queen and ace.
Helgemo drew trumps in four rounds and led the 9. What are your thoughts
now, sitting West?
If West plays low, declarer will run the 9 successfully. He continues with the
A and 10, overtaking with dummy’s jack, and can then throw two black-suit
losers on the remaining diamonds for +680. Boye had no difficulty in reading
the diamond position. He covered the 9 with the Q! Declarer had to win with
dummy’s K or the defenders would cash two club tricks. The diamonds were
now blocked and Helgemo made only three diamond tricks instead of five, scoring
+620.
You might fondly hope to pick up a couple of IMPs with a smart defense like
that but at the other table Boye’s team mates, Fantoni and Nunes, reached 6 after
North had opened the bidding. Claudio Nunes sneaked through the 9, early in
the play, and scored up his slam with five hearts, five diamonds and the two black
aces.
It’s time for a bidding problem and we will give you this hand held by Tony
Forrester, sitting North in the 2002 Life Master Pairs:

 A K 10 8 6  6 5 4 3  6  A 8 5

54 | Bridge at the Edge

 With only the opponents vulnerable, the bidding starts like this:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Forrester Brogeland
1
pass 1 2 3
3 dbl pass 4
pass ?

Your second-round double is for takeout and partner responds with a cuebid of 4.
What will you bid now?
Forrester placed Boye with great diamonds. The opponents’ bidding, along
with the 4 bid, meant that Boye would hold at most one heart and maybe a void.
Forrester bid 6, on his singleton diamond, with every expectation that this would
be a good contract. The next player doubled and this was the full layout:

E-W Vul.  A K 10 8 6 2002 Life Master Pairs

Dealer South  6 5 4 3 Phoenix, Arizona
 6
 A85
 Q J 9 7 5 3 2  —
 Q 10 8 N  AK972
 3 W E  10 9 4
S
 76  QJ432
 4
 J
 AKQJ8752
 K 10 9

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Forrester Brogeland
1
pass 1 2 3
3 dbl pass 4
pass 6 dbl all pass

East’s Lightner double requested an unusual lead, often in dummy’s first-bid suit.
It was not difficult for West to find the spade lead. East ruffed and cashed the
A successfully. That was one down and poor reward for North-South’s splendid
bidding sequence. Boye and Tony finished third in the event and were left wishing
that they had not bid this hand so well!

4 There’s No Justice! | 55
 One good diamond slam deserves another and this time it was Boye’s opponents
who reached the top spot.

Neither Vul.  J 10 2008 Buffet Cup

Dealer South  A K J Europe - USA
 Q98
 AQ962
 K Q 8 5 3 2  976
 7 N  986432
 K 3 W E  76
S
 J874  10 5
 A4
 Q 10 5
 A J 10 5 4 2
 K3

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Lindqvist Molson Brogeland Sokolow
1NT
2 dbl rdbl 3
pass 6 all pass

Espen Lindqvist’s 2 showed length in an undisclosed major and Boye’s redouble

asked partner to identify his major. The American women, Tobi Sokolow and
Janice Molson, wasted no time in reaching the superb contract of 6. How would
you give this the best chance when West leads the K?
Sokolow won the spade lead and laid down the A. (A failing trump finesse
would result in immediate defeat, while other chances were available. Also, West’s
overcall suggested that he would hold the K.) Both defenders followed to the first
round of diamonds but the king did not fall.
Declarer now needed to dispose of her spade loser. She played three rounds
of clubs, hoping to throw a spade. If West held a doubleton club, he might have to
ruff with the K and all would then be well. It was Boye in the East seat who held
only two clubs. He ruffed with the 7, the last outstanding low trump. Declarer
overruffed, crossed to the A and ruffed a club in her hand to establish dummy’s
last club. It remained only to cross to a heart to discard the spade on dummy’s
thirteenth club. When Sokolow led a second round of hearts, however, West ruffed
with the K and cashed the Q. This was justice at its very harshest. After some
excellent bidding and some equally good play, declarer was one down.
The board became all the more galling when it transpired that this was the
bidding at the matching table:

56 | Bridge at the Edge

 WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH
Freeman Svendsen Hampson Helness
1NT
2 dbl 2 3
pass 4 all pass

Jan-Petter Svendsen thought his 4 bid was forcing. (He could not play safe by
bidding the opponents’ suit because West’s major suit had not been disclosed.)
Helness took the view that 4 was invitational. It was lucky indeed for the European
team to win the board after such an auction.
Look back at the full diagram. In another match there was no swing on the
board; both tables went five down in 6NT!
How often will you hold a 7-6-0-0 hand? The chance of picking up such a
shape is around 18,000-to-1 against. The fact that this book contains three such
hands held by Boye and Erik Sælensminde at championship level, plus a fourth
held by their opponents, tells you that they play a huge amount of bridge. How
would you have bid the South cards here?

N-S Vul.  Q 8 2006 Euro Championship

Dealer West  K Q J 10 8 5 2 Norway - Iceland
 10
 10 8 3
 K 6  J42
 6 4 N  A973
 J 8 4 W E  93
S
 KQ7642  AJ95
 A 10 9 7 5 3
 —
 AKQ7652
 —

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Magnusson Brogeland Thorvaldsson Sælensminde
3 pass 5 5NT
pass 6 pass 6
all pass

Erik’s 5NT showed two places to play. He would have bid 6 with a major two-
suiter, so Boye could infer that he held diamonds and a major. Boye bid 6, with
nothing to lose, and was not surprised to hear the correction to 6. How would
you play this contract when West leads the K?
With diamonds breaking 3-2 and the K onside, perhaps you think that there
is little to the play. (After ruffing the club lead, you can simply play a low trump

4 There’s No Justice! | 57
towards dummy’s queen.) Erik did not play this way. He ruffed the club lead in
his hand, cashed the A and ruffed a diamond with the 8, all following. He then
ran the Q. West won with the K and returned the J. East chose not to ruff this
card because he knew that his J4 could not be caught. Erik had to lose a trump
trick and he was one down.
Why did Erik play this way? West had opened with a non-vulnerable preempt,
so East was favorite to hold the K. By running the Q through East, declarer would
make the slam when East held K, KJ, Kx, KJx, Kxx, KJxx or Kxxx. That
is fifteen combinations. He would succeed also when the Q lost to the K but the
J fell on the second round (unless West could give East a diamond ruff). Leading
low to the Q instead would win against a similar number of combinations, mostly
with West holding the K. West was less likely to hold the K, however, so it is
not an even comparison. In addition to that, Erik would have made the contract
some of the time when diamonds broke 4-1. When the preemptor held a singleton
diamond, for example, he would not have been able to ruff effectively in front of
the dummy. Declarer could establish the diamond suit by ruffing with the 8 and
then run the Q.
So, Erik took the best line and, as a result, went off in a slam that his
grandmother would have made easily. Mind you, she would probably have bid 6
instead of 5NT!
In the Danish town of Odense in 2000 a special bridge match was held to
celebrate the 75th anniversary of contract bridge. The match was between Denmark
and the ‘Rest of the World’. Boye was declarer on this slam hand:

Neither Vul  Q J 8 Denmark - Rest of the World

Dealer West  — Odense, 2000
 AKQ76
 A8753
 9 7 3  K52
 K Q 9 7 6 2 N  10 5 4 3
 5 W E  10 9 4 3
S
 J 10 4  Q6
 A 10 6 4
 AJ8
 J82
 K92

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Jens Auken Zia Sabine Auken Brogeland
2 dbl 3 4
pass 5 pass 5
pass 5NT pass 6
all pass

58 | Bridge at the Edge

At the other table Helgemo had opened 3 on the West cards and the bidding went
3 - dbl - 4 - 4. With spades 3-3 and the K onside, all thirteen tricks were
made. So, Boye would pick up a useful swing if he could make 6.
Boye won the diamond lead with the jack and ruffed the 8 in dummy. The
A and K brought the good news that trumps were 3-2. A successful spade
finesse would now produce twelve tricks but (unfortunately for him!) Boye had
noticed that he could also make the slam if West held the K. He cashed the A
and ruffed the J in dummy. Boye then turned to the diamond suit. West could
not ruff any of these since he would then have to play a spade into declarer’s tenace
or concede a ruff-and-sluff. When Jens Auken refused to ruff three times, this
strengthened Boye’s view that he might hold the K. These cards remained:

 QJ
 —
 7
 8
 9 7  K52
 K N  10
 — W E  —
S
 J  —
 A 10 6
 —
 —
 9

On dummy’s last diamond Boye threw the 6 and West the 9. (If he discarded the
K instead, he would be thrown in with a trump). Expecting that he had squeezed
West down to a bare K, Boye played a spade to his ace. Would this deal travel
round the world’s bridge magazines? No. To Boye’s great disappointment it was
only a humble 7 that appeared from West. Another grandmother-proof contract
had bitten the dust.
When the last round of the 2010 Copenhagen Invitational started, Erik
Sælensminde and Boye were lying second, facing Poland’s fourth-placed Jassem
and Martens. The prize money went down to third place and the Norwegian pair
could afford to lose this match by 17 IMPs, but not 18, to come in the money. Boye
will take up the story:

4 There’s No Justice! | 59
 We had a terrible start to the 10-board match and were down 35 IMPs
halfway through. I was desperate to create a swing when I picked up these
cards for Board 6:

 973
 92
 10 7 6 4 2
 J 10 4

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Martens Sælensminde Jassem Brogeland
pass 1 dbl ?

We were non-vulnerable; the Poles were vulnerable. What would you have
done to pick up some much-needed IMPs?
Hoping that the opponents had a vulnerable game, I decided to
redouble — showing 10+ points and normally looking for blood! Martens
passed, my partner did the same, and Jassem bid 2. What now?
I could hope that my redouble had done the trick. I didn’t see them
ending up in 2, though, so I followed up my initial redouble with a double
for penalties! I hoped West would bid 2 and it would go two passes to
me, so I could finally put a green Pass card on the table. Martens bid
2, asking partner to choose a black suit, and Jassem bid 2. I couldn’t
do much else than pass for now — forcing — and it looked like we were
heading for trouble.
Martens passed, and Erik, probably disappointed that I couldn’t
double 2, bid 3. I passed, and Martens did the same. We had escaped!
This was the layout:

60 | Bridge at the Edge

 E-W Vul.  J 2 2010 Bridge Invitational
Dealer West  K Q J 5 4 Copenhagen, Denmark
 85
 AK53
 A Q 8 6  K 10 5 4
 10 8 7 6 N  A3
 — W E  AKQJ93
S
 98762  Q
 973
 92
 10 7 6 4 2
 J 10 4

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Martens Sælensminde Jassem Brogeland
pass 1 dbl rdbl (!)
pass pass 2 dbl (!)
2 pass 2 pass
pass 3 all pass

Erik went two down in 3, losing 100, which looked like a great result as
our opponents were cold for a vulnerable spade game.
Did large wads of Danish kroner end up in our suitcases as a result?
Sadly, no. Three of the eight E/W pairs had soared into 6, going down
because of the 5-2 diamond split. We picked up only 5 IMPs on the board
and were overtaken by the Poles in the final rankings. No glory, no prize
money, but a thrilling ride it sure was!

4 There’s No Justice! | 61
 5
Interesting Bidding
Treatments

In this chapter we will look at various bidding treatments that have served Boye
handsomely over the years. One real-life example of a particular method faring
well may not be enough to convince you to use it, we realize. Still, you may find
something that catches your eye.

Showing a major-suit raise

We look first at the important area of responding to one of a major when you have
a good fit for partner. Suppose your partner opens 1 or 1 and you respond 3
or 3. What meaning do you assign to these bids? A popular method is Bergen
Raises, where these bids indicate a four-card raise in a hand of a particular strength.
Boye prefers to use mini-splinter bids, showing a limit raise with a shortage in the
bid suit. This allows the opener to judge how well the two hands fit.

5 Interesting Bidding Treatments | 63

 Here is the method in action, using Boye’s system at that time:

N-S Vul.  J 7 6 5 1997 Bermuda Bowl

Dealer South  10 8 4 Norway - Croatia
 8
 A8532
 8 4 2  9
 9 N  AKQ753
 Q J 10 7 4 3 W E  K92
S
 Q 10 4  J97
 A K Q 10 3
 J62
 A65
 K6

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

J.Caric Brogeland A.Caric Sælensminde
1
pass 3 3 4
all pass

Judging the South cards to be too strong for a 15-17 point 1NT, Erik Sælensminde
opened 1. Boye’s 3 response carried the message: ‘We may be able to make
game in spades if you have a particularly good fit for my diamond singleton.’
Erik’s diamond holding then allowed him to bid game — despite the unpromising
holding in hearts, the suit bid by East.
At the other table, South did open 1NT, followed by two passes. Terje Aa bid
2 on the East cards, promising six cards in one of the majors. South was reluctant
to bid 2 immediately and must have been disappointed when 2 was passed out
and made with two overtricks!
Players refine their systems over the years. When partner opens 1, these are
the fit-showing responses that Boye now favors:

2 natural
2 shortage in a minor, invitational, 2NT asks for shortage
2NT Jacoby, game-forcing
3 game-try, usually balanced
3 shortage in spades, invitational
3 preemptive
3, 4, 4 void-showing

As you see, you can discover that partner has a side-suit void, rather than a singleton.
Traditional splinter responses do not allow this distinction.

64 | Bridge at the Edge

 Here is an example of the void-showing responses:

Neither Vul.  — 2002 Hecht Cup

Dealer East  Q 8 3 2 Copenhagen, Denmark
 AKQ52
 J984
 7 6 5 4 2  A Q 10 9 8
 5 4 N  —
 J 6 W E  10 9 7 4 3
S
 AQ32  K65
 KJ3
 A K J 10 9 7 6
 8
 10 7

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
pass 1
pass 3 pass 4NT
pass 5 pass 6
all pass

What should Boye bid on the second round? In a bidding competition you might
take a scientific route, cuebidding 4 to show a diamond control but no club
control. On this particular deal you would then stop in 4 and pick up 10 points
for your scholarly efforts. At the table, life is different. It was likely that North held
a club control. Even if that were not the case, a helpful opening lead might allow
the slam to make. Boye therefore bid Roman Keycard Blackwood. When he heard
of one ace opposite, he bid the slam. When West missed the club lead, choosing a
trump, Boye made the contract easily.
The responses to 1 are similar to those after a 1 opening: 3 shows the
shortage in a minor and 3 is invitational; 4/4/4 show a void.

Continuations after a Jacoby 2NT response

The use of the Jacoby 2NT response to show a game-forcing raise of 1 or 1 is
widespread nowadays. The value of such a convention lies in the continuations.
Look up the basic version of Jacoby in some book intended for improving players
and you could easily be unimpressed. 1 - 2NT - 3 shows a singleton diamond,
the book may learnedly inform you, and 1 - 2NT - 4 shows a good five-card
diamond suit. Yes, but that is not much use when you have little idea of the
opener’s strength!

5 Interesting Bidding Treatments | 65

 Boye uses a scheme where a side-suit rebid at the three-level is natural and
shows a non-minimum, non-flat hand. (When the opener has six trumps, the side
suit may be of only three cards.). Partner can then ask for a shortage with three of
the major or he can bid 3NT as a general try. Typically, 3NT shows 14-15 points
and values in both possible singleton suits.
Let’s see an example of this style of Jacoby 2NT:

N-S Vul.  Q 5 4 2004 Olympiad

Dealer South  A 10 9 4 Norway - USA
 AQ2
 AQ2
 J 10 8 3  K762
 5 3 N  87
 K J 8 W E  10 9 6 5 3
S
 J973  10 6
 A9
 KQJ62
 74
 K854

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Rosenberg Sælensminde Zia Brogeland
1
pass 2NT pass 3
pass 3 pass 3NT
pass 4 pass 4
pass 5 pass 5
pass 6 all pass

Erik Sælensminde’s Jacoby 2NT showed at least four-card heart support and was
game-forcing. Boye’s 3 was natural and showed an unbalanced, non-minimum
hand. 3 asked for shortage and 3NT shows 2-5-2-4 shape (or possibly 2-6-2-3).
On a hand that was at the bottom end of non-minimum, Boye could have bid 4
over 3, so 3NT was another all-so-important indication of playing strength. Erik’s
4 was a cuebid and 4 a sign-off. With a stronger hand, Boye could have bid 4
instead — a ‘last train’ slam try, not saying anything about a diamond control.
North continued with 5, which carried the message ‘I am still interested in a
slam but I do not have a spade control.’ Boye would have signed off without a spade
control in his hand. His actual 5 showed a spade control but said nothing about
his diamond holding.
That is how the Jacoby 2NT should be used — as a springboard for the
exchange of information. How would you play the slam when West leads the J?

66 | Bridge at the Edge

 It is possible that West is leading from KJ10x and some players would try
their luck with dummy’s Q, intending to rely on a subsequent diamond finesse if
East produced the K. Since it was much more likely that East held the K, Boye
played low from dummy and won with the A. He drew trumps in two rounds
and continued with the three top clubs. If the suit had broken 3-3 he would
have discarded dummy’s penultimate spade on the 13th club and exited in spades,
hoping to endplay East. (This was the reason for playing low at Trick 1.) When
diamonds failed to break, Boye tried a spade to the queen anyway since this would
endplay East if he had started with Kx. It would also set up a diamond discard
if, unexpectedly, West had led from the KJ10. East won with the K and exited
safely with a spade. A subsequent diamond finesse succeeded and the slam was
made.
At the other table Roy Welland played in 6NT on the North cards. He won
the diamond lead with the queen, crossed to a heart and led the 9. When West
covered with the 10, he concluded that East held the K and held back his Q.
He won the diamond return and eventually relied on a 3-3 club break or a squeeze
in the black suits (four clubs lying with the K). This line failed and Norway
gained 17 IMPs.

2NT relay after a raise by opener

Let’s look at something different now. When the bidding starts 1 - 1 - 2, the
opener has shown a minimum-range hand with three or four spades. (In some
parts of the world four cards are needed for a raise by the opener, but that is not a
method that we recommend.) How can responder discover more about partner’s
hand? The answer is to use 2NT as a relay bid.
After a start of 1 - 1; 2 - 2NT, the opener rebids along these lines:

3: 3-5-1-4 shape

3: 3-5-4-1
3: 3-5-3-2 or 3-5-2-3, minimum
3: 4-5-2-2, minimum
3NT: 3-5-3-2 or 3-5-2-3, maximum
4: 4-5-3-1
4: 4-5-1-3
4: 4-5-2-2, maximum

So, three-level bids in a new suit show three-card support and four cards in the suit
bid. Four-level bids show four-card support and a shortage. If responder bids 3
at his third turn, this shows only game-try values.
The 2NT relay bid made life easy on this slam deal from the Norway-Turkey
match in the 2008 European Championship:

5 Interesting Bidding Treatments | 67

  A K 10 9 8 5  QJ7
 K N  A J 10 8 3
 10 7 5 W E  Q
S
 AK9  Q873

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Lindqvist Brogeland
1 pass
1 pass 2 pass
2NT pass 3 pass
3 pass 3 pass
4NT pass 5 pass
5 pass 6 all pass

Espen Lindqvist bid 2NT to discover more about Boye’s hand. The 3 response
was good news, indicating four clubs and a singleton diamond. He bid 3 to set
spades as trumps (3 would have been only a game-try, remember) and continued
with 4NT. Over the one-ace response he continued with 5 to ask about the queen
of trumps. Without this card, Boye would have signed off in 5, which would
become the final contract. Holding the trump queen, but no king in the side suits,
Boye jumped to 6.
As you see, the key to the hand was East’s singleton diamond opposite West’s
three spot cards. Suppose East’s minors had been swapped and he had bid 3 over
the 2NT relay. The bidding would then have stopped in game — high enough
when there might well be three losers in diamonds.

Three-level responses to 1NT

When partner opens 1NT what meaning do you assign to a three-level response,
such as 3? For many years Boye has used such responses to show a shortage,
opening the possibility of a minor-suit contract when the short suit is under-
protected. The method worked well on this deal:

68 | Bridge at the Edge

 E-W Vul.  K J 5 2000 Olympiad
Dealer North  A 6 3 Norway - Bulgaria
 K64
 AJ98
 Q 8 4  A 10 9 6
 K Q 9 8 2 N  J754
 Q J W E  872
S
 10 4 3  72
 732
 10
 A 10 9 5 3
 KQ65

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Popova Sælensminde Gunev Brogeland
1NT pass 3
pass 4 pass 5
all pass

When Boye showed short hearts, Erik Sælensminde knew that 3NT would not be
the right game. With the perfect fit in hearts, ace opposite the singleton, a slam
might be possible if partner was strong. Erik therefore rebid 4. Boye had no wish
to play in a slam and signed off in his lowest playable suit, the bidding coming to
a halt in 5.
Boye won the K opening lead and drew trumps. When he played the K, West
followed with the Q. What should declarer do on the next round of diamonds?
Looking at the diamond suit in isolation, the Principle of Restricted Choice states
that a singleton Q or J is twice as likely as a holding of QJ. By finessing the
10 on the second round, whenever the queen or jack appears from West, you
will pick up the diamond suit two times out of three. There is a secondary issue
here, however. If you play the A on the second round and find that West began
with QJ, you will definitely make the contract; you can discard two spades from
dummy on the diamonds and ruff a spade for your eleventh trick. If instead you
finesse the 10 and West shows out, you will still need to guess the spade suit
correctly. You cannot afford to lose two spade tricks in that case, as you fight your
way back to dummy for a second diamond finesse. Suppose the spade honors are
split and you finesse the J, losing to East’s Q. He will force your last trump with
a heart and West will cash some hearts when he rises with the A.
It was a close decision and Boye decided to follow Restricted Choice, finessing
the 10 to West’s J. West duly switched to a spade, putting declarer to a guess.
With little to guide him, Boye made the happy choice to call for dummy’s J. This
forced the A and the club game was made.

5 Interesting Bidding Treatments | 69

3NT response to a 2 opening
Sometimes you add a gadget to your card and have to wait a very long time for an
opportunity to use it. Boye likes to play that a 3NT response to a strong 2 shows
a solid suit somewhere. One advantage of the method is that the strong hand can
then play the contract. Is Boye still waiting to use this wonderful bidding weapon?
No, indeed…

Both Vul.  8 4 3 1998 Nordic Championship

Dealer South  AKQJ9832 Norway - Faroe Islands
 J2
 —
 J 2  10 9 6 5
 7 6 N  10 5
 Q 10 9 3 W E  A7654
S
 Q9432  87
 AKQ7
 4
 K8
 A K J 10 6 5

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Mouritsen Sælensminde Joensen Brogeland
2
pass 3NT pass 6
all pass

With the K protected from the opening lead, 6 was safe. What would have
happened if North had played the contract instead? Any self-respecting East would
have underled the A. The only chance, isn’t it?!

70 | Bridge at the Edge

 6
Find the Lady

Many a contract depends on locating a missing queen and there are few areas of
the game where experts have a greater edge over non-experts. In this chapter we
will look at several deals where success depended on reading which defender held
a vital queen.
The time-honored method for deciding such matters is to gain as much
information as possible on the lie of the other suits. Boye followed this well-beaten
track on our first deal:

Both Vul.  J 9 5 2 2003 Bermuda Bowl

Dealer South  A 5 Norway - China
 A J 10
 AJ72
 A 10 8  —
 J 8 6 4 N  Q 10 9 2
 6 5 W E  Q983
S
 Q 10 8 3  K9654
 KQ7643
 K73
 K742
 —

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Haojun Sælensminde Zejun Brogeland
1
pass 2NT pass 4
pass 4NT pass 5
pass 5 pass 6
pass 6 all pass

Erik Sælensminde’s Jacoby 2NT showed a game-forcing raise in spades and Boye’s
4 rebid indicated a singleton or void club. Erik used Roman Keycard Blackwood
to discover that South held one keycard (the K), also the Q and the K. How
would you play the slam when West leads the 3?

6 Find the Lady | 71

 Boye played low in the dummy, ruffing East’s 9. A heart to the ace was
followed by the A, for a diamond discard. When a trump was played to the
king, West ducked. He won the trump continuation and exited with a third round
of trumps to dummy’s jack. East, meanwhile, discarded a club, a diamond and
another club. All followed to the K and a heart ruff in dummy. A club ruff then
brought down East’s K.
Boye’s last four cards were the Q and the K74. Dummy held the J and
AJ10. Still unwilling to commit himself in diamonds, Boye played his last trump,
throwing the J from dummy. Both defenders discarded a heart honor on this
trick. What evidence had emerged? East was known to have started with no
spades, four hearts and at least five clubs. His early discard of a diamond suggested
that he had started with 0-4-4-5 shape. Indeed, if his clubs were headed by the
KQ9, he would surely have played an honor at Trick 1. East had started with four
diamonds to West’s two and was therefore a 2-to-1 favorite to hold the missing Q.
Boye duly finessed East for the missing queen and made the slam. The Chinese
declarer played the slam similarly and no swing resulted.
On our next deal Boye faced Italian world champions, Lauria and Versace. His
slam contract depended on finding the Q.

N-S Vul.  Q J 2010 Euro Championships

Dealer West  Q J 10 Norway - Italy
 AK9
 AKJ86
 A 7 6 5 4 3  10 9 8 2
 6 N  7542
 J 6 2 W E  10 8 5 4
S
 Q 10 9  7
 K
 AK983
 Q73
 5432

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Versace Svendsen Lauria Brogeland
2 dbl 4 5
pass 6 all pass

Look at the bidding first. What sort of hand would you expect South to hold for
his 5 bid?

72 | Bridge at the Edge

 When the vulnerability is adverse, South should have a hand where he expects
to make 5. Odin Svendsen was confident that Boye would hold a good heart suit.
It was also clear from the East-West bidding that South would hold at most one
spade. He raised to 6 and that ended the bidding.
Alfredo Versace cashed the A and switched to the 10. How would you play
the contract?
All depended on picking up the club suit. If West held 109, East’s queen
would fall on the second round. If instead West held Q109, declarer would have
to finesse on the second round. Boye won the first round of clubs with dummy’s
ace and drew trumps, noting that West held only one trump. To gain as much
information as possible, he next played the A, K and Q. East followed with the
4, 5 and 8; West played the 2, 6 and J. All now depended on who held the
10. If West held it, his shape was 6-1-4-2 and the Q would drop. If East held it,
West’s shape would be 6-1-3-3 and a club finesse would be necessary.
It may seem that Restricted Choice applied to West’s cards in the diamond suit.
If you play him for three diamonds whenever he plays the jack or ten on the third
round, you will gain when he started with Jxx or 10xx and lose only to J10xx
— odds of 2-to-1 in your favor. Is that right, though? If East had started with
108xx, he would have a free choice of cards to play on the third round.
Boye led a second round of clubs and finessed dummy’s J. East showed out
and the slam was made. When asked by email why he had played clubs in this
way, Boye replied:

I was not sure if Restricted Choice applied to West’s play of the J. East
also had two cards that he could follow with if he held four diamonds (the
10 and 8). Isn’t that kind of Restricted Choice too when he played the 8
instead of the 10? I think you would have to ask a math professor, and I
am still not sure you would get the right answer!
I recalled that Lauria had jumped to 4 — was that not a bit more
likely with xxxx-xxxx-10xxx-x rather than xxxx-xxxx-xxx-Qx? On the other
hand he would be more tempted to sacrifice in 6 with the first hand since
6 more or less has to be gin. The game of bridge is truly fascinating.
I did get a feeling, though, when Versace switched to the 10 quite
quickly, that he had the queen of clubs. And looking at dummy (unless
I need to guess clubs), the only way to beat the contract is to find Lauria
with a club void. So I played more with my gut feeling than a sure knowledge
of the odds.

Several years before, in the European junior championships, Boye had faced a
curiously similar guess for the Q:

6 Find the Lady | 73

 Both Vul.  A 1998 European Juniors
Dealer South  Q J 10 6 Norway - Germany
 K763
 A 10 7 5
 J 6 5 3 2  K Q 10 9 4
 2 N  853
 Q J 10 5 W E  A942
S
 Q86  3
 87
 AK974
 8
 KJ942

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Saur Brogeland
1
pass 2NT pass 3
pass 3 pass 4
pass 4 pass 4NT
pass 5 pass 6
all pass

Boye’s 3 rebid, facing the Jacoby 2NT, was natural and showed a non-minimum
hand. Øyvind Saur’s 3 then indicated a singleton. Two cuebids, followed by
Roman Keycard Blackwood, led to a final contract of 6.
West’s Q won the first trick and Boye ruffed the second diamond with the ace.
All depended on the club guess and it was therefore essential to gather as much
distributional information as possible. Boye crossed to a trump, ruffed another
diamond, returned to dummy with a second round of trumps and ruffed dummy’s
last diamond. Noting that diamonds had broken 4-4, and trumps 1-3, he crossed
to the A and drew East’s last trump. West, meanwhile, had discarded two spades.
How did the clubs lie? West had shown up with five red cards to East’s seven,
which tilted the odds slightly in favor of him holding three clubs rather than two.
No sort of count was available on the spade suit but Boye reasoned that West might
well have found a spade overcall if he held six spades. If he held only five spades,
as suggested by the lack of an overcall, this would give him 5-1-4-3 shape!
Boye played a club to the king and then finessed West for the Q. That was
twelve tricks and a big swing for Norway when the German South went down in
the same contract, playing for the drop in clubs.
We will end with a 3NT deal from a matchpoint event. There was a two-way
guess for the Q and the considerations were quite different from those prevailing
at IMPs. We will present only two hands initially, so you can decide how to play the
contract yourself. Boye will then describe his thoughts at the time:

74 | Bridge at the Edge

 N-S Vul.  A J 10 6 2010 World mixed pairs final
Dealer North  4 3 Philadelphia, PA
 AJ9
 A864

N
W E
S

 KQ3
 A52
 K 10 8 6 4
 92

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Jo Morse Brogeland
1 2 3NT
all pass

West leads the 8, overtaken with the 9. I duck the first round of hearts
and East continues with the K. I can assume the hearts are 6-2 after
the jump overcall. In any case, it would be risky to hold up again because
a club switch would be awkward. I win with the A, West following with the
7, and must now consider how to play the diamond suit. What would your
thoughts have been? (Remember that it is matchpoint scoring.)
At IMPs there would be no problem whatsoever. West has no heart
left to play. Cashing the A and running the J into the safe West hand
would guarantee you at least ten tricks, even if West won with the Q. At
pairs, I don’t think this is the best line at all. When West holds the Q, you
can score +660 instead of +630 by finessing against West and scoring
five diamond tricks. In that case the extra 30 points will be worth a full
half of a top. The whole field will surely be in 3NT, so your score on the
board depends almost 100% on whether you guess the position of the Q
correctly.
I mark time by playing a spade to the jack and a spade back to the
king, to check if East has a singleton spade. (East and West would then
hold seven major-suit cards each and there would be no reason to finesse
West for the Q.) When East follows with the 2 and 4, it is clear that
he holds at least two more cards in the majors than West. That makes
West favorite to hold the Q and I am going to play for that chance.
Should I cash the K on the first round, in case East holds a singleton
Q? No, because this would prevent me from scoring five diamond tricks
when East holds a singleton 7, 5, 3 or 2 in the suit, which is four times
as likely. The right play is to run the 10 at Trick 3, underplaying with

6 Find the Lady | 75

 dummy’s 9. I do this, confident that it is the right play, and the whole
hand turns out to be like this:

 A J 10 6
 43
 AJ9
 A864
 9 8 7 5  42
 8 7 N  K Q J 10 9 6
 7 5 3 2 W E  Q
S
 K 10 7  QJ53
 KQ3
 A52
 K 10 8 6 4
 92

West did hold more diamonds than East, as I had expected. Unfortunately,
East held the singleton Q and proceeded to cash four more heart tricks.
For minus 200 on the board we scored only 2 matchpoints out of 154.
Although the bidding must have been similar at many tables, the other
declarers obviously felt they should finesse into the safe hand. What a
bunch of cowards!

76 | Bridge at the Edge

 7
Winning the Great Race

The most important contract in bridge is 3NT. It is the most enticing game to bid,
with its target of only nine tricks; it is also the game that is bid most frequently. In
this chapter we will see some of the key techniques that you can use to ‘win the
3NT race’ — in other words, to score nine tricks before the defenders score five.
We will launch proceedings with a fairly gentle deal, where Boye was partnering
his wife Tonje.

E-W Vul.  A K 7 4 2 2005 Euro Open mixed SF

Dealer North  A 8 6 4 Tenerife
 A4
 53
 10 8 6  Q93
 Q J 7 5 N  10 3
 K 10 8 3 W E  J765
S
 94  K Q 10 7
 J5
 K92
 Q92
 AJ862

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Rubins T. Brogeland Romanovska B. Brogeland
1 pass 1NT
pass 2 pass 2NT
pass 3NT all pass

West leads the 3 to East’s jack and your queen. What is your plan?
Four spade tricks will give you the contract and you would like to lead towards
the J on the first round. If East holds the Q, you will then score the tricks you
need against a 4-2 break either way round. How should you cross to dummy for
the first spade lead?

7 Winning the Great Race | 77

 Suppose you cross to the A and lead the 2, with East holding something like
Q9xx. He will be able to win with the Q and knock out the A entry while the
spade suit is blocked. Realizing that he could afford to lose one spade and three
diamonds even if West had led from Kxx, Boye preferred to enter dummy with the
A. When he led a spade, East rose with the Q and all was well.
Boye represented Norway for the first time in 1993. On this deal he arrived in
a Meckwell game (the USA’s Meckstroth and Rodwell are famous for playing in 3NT
with fewer than the requisite number of points).

Neither Vul.  A 4 2 1993 Nordic Under-21s

Dealer East  Q J 7 5 Kongenshus, Denmark
 10 3
 AJ94
 Q 9 8 5 3  7
 K 9 6 3 2 N  A4
 J 2 W E  A876
S
 6  KQ8752
 K J 10 6
 10 8
 KQ954
 10 3

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Kristofferson Brogeland
1 1
1 2 pass 2NT
pass 3NT all pass

Only 21 points between the hands, yes, but all four tens were to play a role. West
led a heart to partner’s ace and back came a heart to West’s king. How would you
tackle the contract when West plays a third heart to dummy’s J, East throwing a
club?
West had responded 1 and shown up with five hearts. If his distribution
was 5-5-1-2, East would be 5-5 in the minors and would have opened 1. It was
therefore likely that West’s shape was 5-5-2-1. Boye played a diamond to his king
and ran the 10 to East’s Q. When East returned a low diamond, Boye rose with
the Q and the J fell from West.
With seven top tricks available at this stage Boye led the J from his hand,
covered by the Q and A. The trick count was up to eight and East was now ripe
for an endplay. Boye cashed dummy’s Q, throwing a spade from his hand, and
crossed to the K. These cards remained:

78 | Bridge at the Edge

  4
 —
 —
 AJ9
 9 8  —
 9 6 N  —
 — W E  A8
S
 —  K8
 10
 —
 95
 3

When the 10 was played, East was in trouble. Sensing his fate, he discarded the
8. Boye then threw him in with a diamond to lead into dummy’s AJ tenace.
Meckwell would be proud of him!
The next deal illustrates two techniques that arise frequently at notrump.

Neither Vul.  Q 6 5 2006 Swiss Teams

Dealer South  9 3 Summer Nationals, Chicago
 865
 A J 10 9 3
 A 10 8  9743
 K 8 7 N  Q J 10 4
 K J 9 3 2 W E  10 4
S
 72  Q64
 KJ2
 A652
 AQ7
 K85

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Del’Monte Brogeland
1NT
pass 2 pass 2
pass 3NT all pass

If North held four spades and was looking for a 4-4 fit in that suit, he would have
continued with an artificial 3 on the second round. His jump to 3NT did not
therefore promise four spades, as it would in many systems. What is your plan
when West leads the 3 to East’s ten and your queen?
Suppose you develop the clubs first, cashing the K and finessing the J. East
will win with the Q and clear the diamond suit. When you play on spades to seek

7 Winning the Great Race | 79

the extra tricks that you need, West will win with the ace and defeat the contract
by cashing his diamond winners.
Foreseeing this possible outcome, Boye led the K at Trick 2. West won with
the A and led the K to clear the diamond suit. Boye won the second round of
diamonds and only then turned to the club suit. He played the K and led low
to dummy’s J, finessing into the safe (East) hand. The finesse lost but East had
no diamond to play. Suppose East had begun with 1042 and could return a
diamond; the suit would then be 4-3 and declarer would lose only two diamonds,
a spade and a club, again making the contract.
The deal we have just seen illustrated two of the most important techniques in
notrump play. The first was ‘attacking the entry to the danger hand’. Boye drove
out the A first because this card was the potential entry to the dangerous West
hand. The second was ‘finessing into the safe hand’. After West’s diamonds had
been established, it was clear to finesse clubs in such a way that only East could
gain the lead.
You may wonder what would have happened if West had somehow diagnosed
a switch to the 7 after winning with the A. In that case, declarer would hold
up the A for two rounds and still make the contract if he guessed correctly which
defender held the Q.
Test yourself on the next deal, where you have to decide which suit to attack in
the search for the extra tricks you need.

Neither Vul.  K 8 7 5 2008 Euro Championships

Dealer North  — Norway - Germany
 A Q 10 3 2
 A952
 A J 10  6432
 8 7 5 3 N  A J 10 9 4
 7 6 4 W E  KJ8
S
 863  4
 Q9
 KQ62
 95
 K Q J 10 7

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Piekarek Lindqvist Smirnov Brogeland
1 1 3NT
all pass

How will you play the notrump game when West leads the 3, East playing the 9?
Boye saw that if the defenders persisted with hearts, giving him two tricks in
the suit, one spade trick would take him past the finishing line. Since he intended

80 | Bridge at the Edge

to set up the spade trick before the defenders had made their second move in
hearts, he decided to keep all of dummy’s spades to protect him in that suit. (At the
other table the German declarer discarded a spade from dummy on the first trick,
after which the contract cannot be made against best defense.)
Boye discarded a diamond from dummy on the first trick, winning East’s 9
with the K. The J to dummy’s A was followed by a spade to the queen and ace.
West persisted with the 5, to East’s 10 and declarer’s Q, and Boye had the nine
tricks that he had visualized.
At the other table, after the same auction, Michael Elinescu was declarer for
Germany. A heart was led and he discarded the 5 from dummy. Terje Aa, East
for Norway, won with the A and returned the J (it works better to play a middle
heart on the first trick, retaining the A as an entry). Elinescu won with the Q,
throwing a club from dummy, and ran the 9 to the J. At double-dummy declarer
can duck East’s 10 return, win the next heart and clear a ninth trick in spades. It
was more likely that West held the K than the A, however, particularly after East’s
apparent willingness to release his A. Declarer duly won the third round of hearts
and finessed the Q, going two down when the finesse lost.
Both of Norway’s pairs did well on the next deal, which was played against
their old rivals, Sweden:

N-S Vul.  A K 10 9 7 2008 Euro Championship

Dealer West  4 Norway - Sweden
 10 9 6 5 3
 A6
 8 5 4 2  QJ
 Q 9 8 3 2 N  K 10 5
 A Q W E  J742
S
 10 4  9852
 63
 AJ76
 K8
 KQJ73

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Nyström Lindqvist Bertheau Brogeland
pass 1 pass 2
pass 2 pass 2NT
pass 3 pass 3
pass 3 pass 3NT
all pass

Boye arrived in 3NT (his previous bid of 2NT was game-forcing) and West led the
3 to East’s K, which was allowed to win. The 10 was covered by the J and

7 Winning the Great Race | 81

Q, West persisting with hearts and Boye winning the third round. With only
eight tricks on view, Boye ran five club tricks. West discarded the Q and two
low spades, leaving it clear that the outstanding spades were breaking 2-2. Boye
played spades from the top and had his game. Suppose West had held Qxxx or
Jxxx instead. He could retain a spade guard only at the expense of throwing a
heart winner. Boye would then have been able to duck a spade (or lead the 8 to
West’s bare A).
This was the auction at the other table:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Helgemo Upmark Lund Cullin
pass 1 pass 2
pass 2NT pass 3
pass 3 pass 3NT
all pass

Per-Ola Cullin’s 2 was a forcing-to-game relay. The 2NT response showed 8-10
ZZ-points, where A=3, K=2 and Q=1, with at least ten cards in spades and one
other suit. The 3 continuation was a further relay and 3 named diamonds
as the second suit. (We will understand if you do not leap to adopt this method
immediately…)
With this information available to him, Børre Lund made the brilliant lead of
the K. The Swedish declarer won with the A, no doubt expecting the lead to be
from the KQ, and played a spade to the ten. Lund won this trick and continued
with the 10 to give the defenders four heart tricks. 3NT was two down and that
was 13 IMPs to Norway.
On the next deal, Boye arrived in 3NT and found that he had er… only three
top tricks available. He will tell you the story of what happened.

E-W Vul.  A Q 10 6 2 2008 Euro Championship

Dealer West  J 4 2 Norway - Bulgaria
 K953
 A
 4  K9875
 9 6 5 N  A 10 7 3
 A 10 8 4 W E  J
S
 Q J 10 8 2  643
 J3
 KQ8
 Q762
 K975

82 | Bridge at the Edge

 WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH
Stoyanov Lindqvist Hristov Brogeland
pass 1 pass 1NT
pass 2 pass 3
dbl pass pass 3NT
all pass

My 3 showed a strongish raise in diamonds. What should I think when

Espen Lindqvist passes the lead-directing double from West?
With a minimum hand Espen would bid 3, following the Principle of
Fast Arrival. His pass suggests that he is interested in game. It would
be too tame to finish in 3, so I bid 3NT. How would you approach this
contract when West leads the Q?
If West holds Kxx, I can score four extra tricks from spades and two
heart tricks would bring the total to nine. Perhaps I should therefore play
a heart at Trick 2? I don’t think so. Since West is a passed hand he is
unlikely to hold both red aces with his good clubs. I would like to knock out
first the ace that West holds. Although I have no idea where the red aces
are, it must be best to lead a low diamond from dummy. If East happens
to hold this ace, he cannot play it without giving me at least two tricks
in the suit.
When I lead a diamond, East plays the jack and West wins my queen
with the ace. He persists with the J and I throw a diamond from dummy,
ducking in my hand. West, who cannot continue clubs into my K9,
switches to a heart. East wins with the A and I have to find a card
from KQ8. It maybe seems right to follow with the 8, retaining two
entries to my hand — to take a spade finesse, reach the K and perhaps
do something with the diamonds. However, East is likely to hold the K.
West would be close to an opening bid with that card; also, East has more
vacant places to hold the missing spade honor. Since I need only four
spade tricks for the contract, I unblock my Q under East’s A. I win
East’s heart return with dummy’s J, arriving at this position:

7 Winning the Great Race | 83

 A Q 10 6 2 
4 
K9 
— 
 4  K9875
 9 N  10 7
 10 8 4 W E  —
S
 10 8 2  6
 J3
 K
 762
 K9

I now lead a low spade from dummy. If East holds the K, as I expect, I will
have time to test the spade break before choosing a discard on the K.
(If spades are 4-2, I will throw the 9; if spades are 5-1, I will throw a spade
and then have to guess the position of the 10.)
Hristov, the Bulgarian East, rises with the K and I have my nine
tricks. If East had played low, a better defense, only three spade tricks
would be available and I would have to guess the diamonds. By Restricted
Choice, single J or 10 is more likely than J10, so I would probably have
made the contract anyway.

We will end the chapter with a couple of deals featuring defense against 3NT. The
first is from Boye’s days as a junior:

N-S Vul.  A 10 9 7 3 2 1996 European Juniors

Dealer South  — Norway - Yugoslavia
 A843
 K94
 Q J  854
 10 8 4 N  KJ972
 Q 9 5 2 W E  K 10 6
S
 Q875  AJ
 K6
 AQ653
 J7
 10 6 3 2

84 | Bridge at the Edge

 WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH
Brogeland Saur
pass
pass 1 2 pass
pass 2 pass 3NT
all pass

With the spades sitting so well, the ugly 3NT contract had every prospect of
succeeding. A heart lead would have given declarer a ninth trick. South’s bidding
— passing on the first round, then leaping to 3NT — had shown good hearts. Boye
was therefore inclined to look elsewhere. He led the 5 and Øyvind Saur won with
the K. A return of the 10 would have assisted declarer and Saur was careful to
play back the 6. Boye’s Q was allowed to win and a third diamond went to East’s
10. When Saur found the only safe return, a spade, declarer had to surrender. He
won with the K, cashed the A and took dummy’s spade winners for one down.
Declarer can make the contract by winning the second round of diamonds with
the A, blocking the suit from the defenders’ point of view. He then runs all his
spades and exits with a club, forcing the defenders to give him a ninth trick.
On the next deal Boye was South with Geir Helgemo East. Take Geir’s cards
and decide how you would have defended Boye’s 3NT contract.

Both Vul.  Q J 8 5 4 2001 Norway premier league

Dealer South  A K 10 Bergen - Trondheim
 Q3
 KQJ
 9
N  Q764
W E  K976
S
 A 10 7 2

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Tislevoll Sælensminde Helgemo Brogeland
pass
pass 1 pass 1NT
pass 2NT pass 3
pass 3NT all pass

North’s rebid of 2NT was forcing and South’s 3 showed an undisclosed minor
of at least five cards. (North could have asked which minor his partner held by
bidding 3.) You are East, defending 3NT, and partner leads the 6 to dummy’s
K. You allow this card to hold, let’s say, and declarer calls for the Q. Will you
cover with the K or not? Consider the matter before reading further.

7 Winning the Great Race | 85

 Helgemo decided to cover with the K and this card won the trick, declarer
playing the 2 and West the J. What will you lead next? When you have decided,
you can look at the full deal:

 QJ854
 A K 10
 Q3
 KQJ
 A K 10 7 6  9
 8 5 2 N  Q764
 J W E  K976
S
 9863  A 10 7 2
 32
 J93
 A 10 8 5 4 2
 54

West led the 6, you will recall, and Geir Helgemo (East) allowed dummy’s K to
win. Declarer called for the Q and Helgemo made one of his rare miscalculations
when he covered with the K. Boye played low and the J appeared from West.
East continued with a low club, won in the dummy. Boye then finessed the 8
successfully and scored five diamond tricks in addition to two hearts and two
clubs. Game made!
If East holds back his K, declarer will make only three diamond tricks instead
of five and will go down. Should East have found this defense? There are some
possible hands for South, containing AJxxx, where failure to cover will allow the
contract to be made. Against that, South might have held AJ10xx, where a cover
allows four diamond tricks (after a duck) and a hold-up would restrict declarer to
three diamond tricks. The play went exactly the same way at the other table and it
was a flat board in +600.
Does anything else strike you about the deal? When East does cover and sees
the J fall from his partner, how should he react to the situation? If he reads the
J as a singleton, as well he may, declarer will have nine tricks on a club return.
Amazingly, the contract can still be beaten by a diamond return! Declarer finesses
the 8 but cannot safely cash all his diamond tricks. On the last diamond he
would have to find one more discard from dummy’s QJ8 AK — QJ. None of
dummy’s seven cards can be spared!

86 | Bridge at the Edge

 8
Opening Leads — Inspired
and Uninspired
In this chapter we will take a close look at some deals where the opening lead
determined the fate of the contract, one way or another. There is a fair degree of
luck involved with selecting an opening lead, of course, but good players seem to
be lucky more often than not!
You would surely like to test your own skill (and good fortune) on these deals,
so the lead problems will be presented in batches of three, with the full deals shown
immediately afterwards.

Set A — Three doubled contracts

1. West WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

 Q76 Brogeland Saur
 A 4 2 3
 J965 pass pass dbl all pass
 942

There is no obvious opening lead, it has to be said. What would your choice be?
(See page 88.)

2. West WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

 KJ75 Erichsen Brogeland
 K 10 5 1 3 4
 J984 pass 4 pass 5
 64 pass pass dbl all pass

What opening lead will you choose? (See page 89.)

3. West WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

 A 10 5 4 3 2 Brogeland Sælensminde
 10 6 4 pass 1
 — 1 dbl pass 2
 A543 dbl 3NT pass 4
pass 6 pass 6
dbl all pass

The North/South bidding sounds unconvincing and it is possible that South

assumed North would hold four hearts when this was not the case. Anyway, what
will you lead? (See page 90.)

8 Opening Leads — Inspired and Uninspired | 87

 1.Neither Vul.  K J 5 3 2 1996 Euro Under-26s
Dealer South  K J 9 Cardiff, Wales
 32
 A87
 Q 7 6  A4
 A 4 2 N  Q 10 8 5
 J 9 6 5 W E  7
S
 942  K Q J 10 6 3
 10 9 8
 763
 A K Q 10 8 4
 5

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Saur
3
pass pass dbl all pass

With only two spades in his hand, Øyvind Saur’s double was a bit risky. Nor can
he have been overjoyed when Boye passed the double for penalties. Look at the
West hand now. Can you see a good opening lead?
Boye led the 2! Underleading an ace is always dangerous. If you enjoy such
thrills and are happy to put up with the odd disappointment, you should consider
it when two or more conditions in this checklist apply: (1) dummy is strong, (2)
dummy is balanced, (3) you don’t have a side entry and (4) a passive lead looks
wrong. Here, South had opened with a non-vulnerable 3 and was unlikely to
hold the K. If that card was in the dummy, declarer would surely misguess when
dummy held the KJ or he held the J. Even without the J, many declarers will
not waste dummy’s king at Trick 1.
Back to the deal in question! Declarer called for the 9 and Saur won with the
10. The K return was won in the dummy and declarer played two top trumps,
discovering the 4-1 break. His luck turned for the better when he ran the 10,
forcing East’s A. Declarer ruffed the Q return, played the Q and was now at the
crossroads. Had he switched back to spades, he would have been able to discard a
heart loser on the fourth spade before West was able to ruff. Not expecting West to
hold three spades after East’s double of 3, declarer preferred to concede a trick to
West’s J. When Boye continued blithely with the 4, declarer called for dummy’s
J and lost two further tricks in the suit, going one down. Breathing freely once
more, the Norwegian pair entered +100 in their scorecards.
How many IMPs did this virtuoso defense gain? At the other table, the
Norwegian North attempted 3NT and went four down, so Turkey gained 3 IMPs
on the board. It would have been far more, of course, if 3 doubled had been
allowed to make.
Back to Question

88 | Bridge at the Edge

 2.Neither Vul.  6 2000 Spring Foursomes
Dealer North  A 8 7 2 Stratford, England
 AK532
 A 10 3
 K J 7 5  A 10 9 8 4 3 2
 K 10 5 N  J963
 J 9 8 4 W E  —
S
 64  52
 Q
 Q4
 Q 10 7 6
 KQJ987

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Erichsen Brogeland
1 3 4
pass 4 pass 5
pass pass dbl all pass

North-South were playing Precision Club, so the 1 opening did not originally
promise diamonds. When North subsequently cuebid spades to agree clubs, Espen
Erichsen placed him with length in both diamonds and clubs. There was also
Boye’s double to consider. The preemptive 3 overcall had not suggested a hand
rich in defense, so the subsequent double was likely to be Lightner. Everything
pointed to East being void in diamonds.
Erichsen led the 9, a suit-preference card that requested a spade return.
Boye ruffed with the 2, West was relieved to see, and returned the 2. This was
another suit-preference card, telling partner that he held another trump for ruffing
purposes. Winning with the K, Erichsen led another diamond and East’s ruff put
the club game one down.
It may seem that such pyrotechnics were unnecessary, since on a passive
defense East-West have a chance to score one trick in each side suit. Suppose West
leads a low spade to East’s ace and a low heart is returned. Declarer plays low from
his hand, preserving the Q, and wins with the A. He then draws trumps and
plays the A, finding a potential loser in that suit. No matter! Declarer plays the
K and runs all his trumps. If West reduces to K J9, he will be thrown in with
a heart to lead into declarer’s diamond tenace. West can attempt to side-step the
endplay by discarding the K, hoping that East has the Q. Not today! Declarer
will score a second heart trick and make the contract.
Back to Question

8 Opening Leads — Inspired and Uninspired | 89

 3.N-S Vul.  Q J 8 7 2004 Euro Championship
Dealer East  Q 5 Norway - Bulgaria
 A85
 KQ82
 A 10 5 4 3 2  96
 10 6 4 N  AJ83
 — W E  63
S
 A543  J 10 9 7 6
 K
 K972
 K Q J 10 9 7 4 2
 —

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Batov Sælensminde Dyakov
pass 1
1 dbl pass 2
dbl 3NT pass 4
pass 6 pass 6
dbl all pass

South’s bid of 2 was based on the assumption that North would hold four hearts
for his negative double. North was alarmed to hear the 4 bid and the bizarre
auction eventually came to a halt in 6 doubled. At the other table the Norwegians
had made 5 with an overtrick, when the A opening lead allowed declarer to ruff
and later discard his spade loser. Norwegian supporters feared that the same lead
here might allow the doubled slam to be made.
Boye looked back at the auction and immediately discounted a lead of the A.
North had announced good spades with his jump to 3NT and South might easily
be void in the suit. How about leading the A? It was somewhat less dangerous
than the other black ace but might still cost in various ways. Boye’s eventual choice
was the 4, spurning the lead of either ace. He could hardly believe it when Erik
Sælensminde produced the A! A spade return put the slam one down and that
was 11 IMPs to Norway.
Back to Question

90 | Bridge at the Edge

Set B Three major-suit games

4. West WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

 974 Brogeland Carruthers Sælensminde Weinstein
 6 3 2 1
 A 10 7 2 pass 1 2 3
 K75 pass 4 pass 4
all pass

North’s 4 was a cuebid, agreeing hearts as trumps. What lead would you
choose? (See page 92.)

5. West WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

 94 Sælensminde Brogeland
 A3 pass 1 4 4
 87432 all pass
 A873

The opponents are vulnerable, you are not. Choose a lead against South’s
contract of 4. (See page 93.)

6. West WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

 J 10 Brogeland Andresen
 Q J pass 2NT
 86 pass 3 pass 3
 QJ76542 pass 3 pass 3
pass 4 all pass

North’s 3 is Puppet (Five-card) Stayman and the 3 response shows at least one
four-card major. North’s 3 shows a four-card spade suit, which allows the strong
hand (South) to play the contract when a spade fit comes to light. Mind you, this
may not be such a clever idea if you manage to find the same opening lead that
Boye did. What is your choice? (See page 94.)

8 Opening Leads — Inspired and Uninspired | 91

 4.Neither Vul.  K 10 6 3 2 2002 Forbo Nations Cup
Dealer South  Q 10 Norway - USA
 KJ853
 2
 9 7 4  QJ85
 6 3 2 N  7
 A 10 7 2 W E  Q94
S
 K75  A Q 10 9 6
 A
 AKJ9854
 6
 J843

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Carruthers Sælensminde Weinstein
1
pass 1 2 3
pass 4 pass 4
all pass

Prospects of beating the contract looked poor after North’s cuebid of 4. It seemed
to Boye that the best chance was to underlead the A. Partner might hold Kx,
allowing two diamond tricks and a ruff to be taken. The same effect might be
possible if partner held Qx, with the K in dummy.
Boye led the 7 and Weinstein called for dummy’s J. On lead with the Q,
Erik Sælensminde returned a trump. Declarer won in the dummy and ruffed a
diamond with the 8. He then cashed the A and led a low club from his hand.
Boye won with the 7 and returned a second round of trumps to dummy’s Q.
One club could be discarded on the K but declarer still had two inescapable club
losers and that was one down.
At the other table, after a similar auction, Fred Gitelman led a club against
the same contract. East won and returned a trump, but Geo Tislevoll was able to
unblock the A, ruff a club and discard a club on the K. When a diamond to the
king was allowed to win, later in the play, he actually made an overtrick.
Perhaps you chose to lead a trump. What would happen then? Declarer wins
in the dummy and realizes that he will not be allowed to ruff a club. He reaches
his hand with the A and leads a diamond towards dummy, hoping to establish
his tenth trick in that suit. You play low smoothly in the West seat and… declarer
misguesses, playing the J from dummy. Partner wins with the Q and, feeling
inspired, switches to a low club. You produce the hoped-for K, draw dummy’s
last trump and beat the contract. Brilliant!
Back to Question

92 | Bridge at the Edge

 5.N-S Vul.  A Q 10 5 2003 Brighton Congress
Dealer West  8 Four Stars final
 A65
 J 10 9 6 4
 9 4  63
 A 3 N  KQ976542
 8 7 4 3 2 W E  Q 10
S
 A873  2
 KJ872
 J 10
 KJ9
 KQ5

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
pass 1 4 4
all pass

Erik Sælensminde reckoned that he needed to give Boye at least one ruff to stand
a chance of defeating the spade game. Although he was longer in diamonds than
in clubs, it was more likely that partner held a singleton club than a void diamond
(particularly as North had opened 1 and might well hold some length there).
Erik led the A and continued with the 8, his highest club to indicate an
entry in the higher of the other two side suits. (The A is visible in the dummy, yes,
but that is no reason for failing to give a clear signal.) Boye ruffed the second club
and returned the 2 to West’s ace. A second club ruff then defeated the contract.
As you see, it would not be good enough to lead the A, expecting that a
suit preference signal from partner would direct your continuation. Even if he
persuaded you to switch to ace and another club, only one ruff would then be
possible.
Back to Question

8 Opening Leads — Inspired and Uninspired | 93

 6.E-W Vul.  8 7 4 3 2002 Grand tournament
Dealer East  10 5 4 Bergen, Norway
 A4
 10 9 8 3
 J 10  K65
 Q J N  A9732
 8 6 W E  10 9 7 3 2
S
 QJ76542  —
 AQ92
 K86
 KQJ5
 AK

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Andresen
pass 2NT
pass 3 pass 3
pass 3 pass 3
pass 4 all pass

The spade game appears to be cast-iron, since declarer cannot lose more than one
spade and at most two hearts. Can you imagine how it was defeated? It doesn’t
look as if a club lead will do the job. East can ruff, it is true, but West has no entry
to deliver a second ruff. When declarer gains the lead he will cross to the A, pick
up the remaining trumps with a finesse and discard two hearts from dummy on the
diamond suit. That will give him an overtrick, in fact.
Boye made the deceptive lead of the J! Martin Andresen won with the A and
returned a low heart. Not blessed with psychic powers, declarer played low on this
trick. Boye won with the Q, surprising all present, and could see (after South’s
2NT opening) that East must be void in clubs. A club ruff was followed by a heart
ruff and another club ruff. The defenders had taken the first five tricks. It would
have been rubbing salt into the wound if the fourth round of hearts had promoted a
further trump trick for the defenders. No, declarer ruffed with the queen and drew
the two outstanding trumps with the ace.
A lead of the jack from Q-J doubleton might misfire if dummy held the king
and partner had the ace. That was unlikely on this deal after South’s 2NT opening.
Some players are reluctant to lead from queen-jack doubleton because they expect
to score a trick if declarer holds A-K-10 and drops an honor on the first round.
He may guess correctly, however, reasoning that if you held a singleton honor you
might have led it.
Back to Question

94 | Bridge at the Edge

Set C Three 3NT contracts

7. West WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

 A J 10 9 4 Brogeland Lauria Sælensminde Versace
 Q 9 6 4 1
 73 1 dbl 2 3
 J5 pass 3 dbl 3NT
all pass

Your partner’s double of 3 tells you that he holds a spade honor and suggests the
lead of a spade. Will you lead a spade or try something else? (See page 96.)

8. West WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

 432 Sælensminde Weinstein Brogeland Garner
 Q4 pass 1 pass 1NT
 92 pass 2 pass 2
 J 10 9 8 4 3 pass 2 pass 3NT
all pass

1NT was semi-forcing and the 2 rebid was either natural or (as here) strong and
artificial. 2 showed 8+ points and was forcing to game. 2 promised at least
three hearts and 16+ points. What lead would you choose? (See page 97.)

9. West WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

 AKQ42 Fallenius Brogeland Welland Shugart
 J 10 7 6 4 pass
 965 1 dbl pass 1NT
 — pass 3NT all pass

What lead will give you the best chance of beating South’s 3NT? (See page 98.)

8 Opening Leads — Inspired and Uninspired | 95

 7.E-W Vul.  8 6 5 1997 Bermuda Bowl QF
Dealer South  A 10 8 5 Norway - Italy
 J85
 AK2
 A J 10 9 4  Q72
 Q 9 6 4 N  K732
 7 3 W E  Q 10 9
S
 J5  987
 K3
 J
 AK642
 Q 10 6 4 3

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Lauria Sælensminde Versace
1
1 dbl 2 3
pass 3 dbl 3NT
all pass

Boye considered the auction carefully, in particular his partner’s lead-directing

double of North’s 3 bid. Was it possible that partner had raised to 2 on a
holding of Kxx and that South had bid 3NT on just Qxx? It seemed unlikely.
South might venture 3NT on a guard of just queen-third on some other auction,
but not when East had shown a high honor (which would be the ace or king in that
case); the loss of the first five tricks would then be almost certain.
Placing declarer with the guarded K, Boye sought a lead that might create an
entry to partner’s hand. He led the 9. The choice of a high card would let partner
know that he was not interested in heart tricks, merely in putting him on lead for
a spade return.
Alfredo Versace rose with dummy A and East gave an encouraging attitude
signal. When the AK failed to drop the Q, declarer could make no more than
eight tricks.
At the other table the auction was identical except that the Italian East did
not double the cuebid of 3. Paradoxically, it was at this table that West (Andrea
Buratti) did lead a spade. Glenn Grøtheim scored his nine top tricks, including the
K, and Norway gained 10 IMPs.
Back to Question

96 | Bridge at the Edge

 8.Neither Vul.  A Q 10 9 5 2007 Bermuda Bowl final
Dealer West  A 10 7 Norway - USA 1
 AJ84
 6
 4 3 2  KJ6
 Q 4 N  98652
 9 2 W E  K75
S
 J 10 9 8 4 3  A2
 87
 KJ3
 Q 10 6 3
 KQ75

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Weinstein Brogeland Garner
pass 1 pass 1NT
pass 2 pass 2
pass 2 pass 3NT
all pass

Although clubs had not been bid naturally (North’s 2 rebid, in combination with
his 2 follow-up, was artificial and showed 16+ points), Erik Sælensminde could
see no future in a club lead. Even if the suit could be established, his own hand was
so weak that he was unlikely to gain the lead thereafter. Partner was the one with
the likely entries, so he tried to find Boye’s best suit by leading the Q.
Steve Garner won with the king and ran the 10, which held. When a second
diamond was played to the jack, Boye won and persisted with hearts. Since East
holds the A doubleton, declarer could make the contract at double-dummy by
setting up two club tricks (to go with three hearts, three diamonds and one spade).
At the table he naturally preferred to win with the J and play on spades. A spade
to the queen lost to the king and Boye cleared the heart suit. A subsequent finesse
of the 10 also failed and Boye scored two heart tricks to put the contract two
down.
At the other table (after bidding of 1 - 1NT; 2 - 3; 3 - 3NT) Zia made a
speculative double in the East seat, based on the limited auction and the position
of his spade honors. Tor Helness promptly redoubled in the South seat and, after
a spade lead, made an easy nine tricks. That was a novel way to pick up 800 and
Norway scored 14 IMPs.
In the interests of journalistic integrity (not a phrase that you hear very often
nowadays), it is only fair to report that Boye had made a similar lead-directing
double of 3NT only two deals before. Steve Garner had redoubled and collected
ten top tricks — a novel way to pick up 1400!
Back to Question

8 Opening Leads — Inspired and Uninspired | 97

 9.Neither Vul.  7 3 2006 Vanderbilt SF
Dealer South  A K 3 2 Dallas, Texas
 AK
 K J 10 6 4
 A K Q 4 2  95
 J 10 7 6 4 N  95
 9 6 5 W E  8432
S
 —  A9832
 J 10 8 6
 Q8
 Q J 10 7
 Q75

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Fallenius Brogeland Welland Shugart
pass
1 dbl pass 1NT
pass 3NT all pass

Björn Fallenius tried his luck with the 6. With her spade stopper still intact, Rita
Shugart needed only to set up some club tricks and negotiate the blockage in the
diamond suit. She won with the A and played dummy’s AK. She then reached
her hand with the Q and played her remaining two diamond winners. When
she turned to the club suit, leading the Q from her hand, the defenders were
powerless. If East ducked the first two rounds of clubs, declarer would have eight
tricks before her and dummy’s K would be the ninth. Roy Welland in fact won
the first club, switching to a spade, and the game was made.
Look back to the opening lead now. South surely had a spade stopper, so there
was no future in leading spades from the top. If West begins with a low spade, East
will return a spade when he wins with the A and the game will go down. The
most likely distribution of the spades around the table is 5-2-2-4. North is likely to
be relatively short in spades for his double; East might have raised to 2 if he held
three-card spade support plus the high card that will be necessary for 3NT to be
beaten. A low spade lead would concede the contract if declarer had eight running
tricks and a spade trick brought this to nine. This is an unlikely outcome compared
with the chance that a low spade will beat the contract.
What were the prospects for the defense after a heart lead? Not only would
East need to hold something good in hearts, he would also need a high card in
one of the minors to prevent declarer running for home. Another point is that
North was likely to hold good hearts after his negative double of 1. All in all, it
does seem that a low spade will give the defenders the best chance of beating the
contract.
Back to Question

98 | Bridge at the Edge

Set D Three doubled games

10. West WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

 QJ8 Sælensminde Pzszcola Brogeland Kwiezcen
 A Q 8 7 4 2 1
 J 10 8 1 pass 4 5
 5 pass pass dbl all pass

What will you lead against the doubled club game? (See page 100.)

11. West WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

 J 10 5 3 Aasand Brogeland
 Q 6 1 pass 1
 AKQ8732 2 2 3 dbl
 — 3 4 dbl all pass

The opponents are vulnerable and you are not. What will you lead against the
doubled heart game? (See page 101.)

12. West WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

 J 10 9 5 4 Lindqvist Smirnov Brogeland Piekarek
 6 4 1NT 2
 10 9 5 pass 4 dbl all pass
 J96

South’s 2 shows hearts and a minor suit. Your partner’s double is for penalties.
What lead will you make? (See page 102.)

8 Opening Leads — Inspired and Uninspired | 99

 10.
E-W Vul.  10 5 4 2007 Hecht Cup
Dealer South  J 6 Copenhagen, Denmark
 973
 Q 10 9 3 2
 Q J 8  A932
 A Q 8 7 4 2 N  K 10 9 5 3
 J 10 8 W E  52
S
 5  K6
 K76
 —
 AKQ64
 AJ874

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Pszczola Brogeland Kwiecen
1
1 pass 4 5
pass pass dbl all pass

A heart lead was unlikely to be productive after East’s raise to the four-level. Erik
Sælensminde led the Q, hoping to claim whatever tricks the defenders were due
in that suit. Boye won with the A and returned the 2, knocking out declarer’s
K.
When Michal Kwiecen played the ace of trumps, both defenders followed but
the king did not drop. He then turned to the diamond suit. If the defender with the
trump king had to follow to three diamonds, dummy’s last spade could be thrown
on the fourth round of diamonds. The Card Gods did not have this outcome in
mind. Boye ruffed the third diamond and the defenders claimed a second spade
trick to put the doubled game one down.
The game would have been easily made without a spade lead, it is true, but
did you spot a chance that declarer missed? Suppose he drops the K under East’s
A. As the cards lie, he will then be able to use the 10 as an entry to dummy; he
can pick up East’s K and make the contract. Whether this is a better line than
the one that declarer chose is a close judgment. If everyone is expected to play
double-dummy on the deal, then the spotlight might turn in Boye’s direction. He
can prevent declarer’s brilliant unblock of the K by declining to play his A on
the first trick!
Back to Question

100 | Bridge at the Edge

 11.
N-S Vul.  K Q 2003 Euro mixed pairs final
Dealer North  A 5 4 2 Menton, France
 64
 QJ632
 J 10 5 3  742
 Q 6 N  K J 10
W
 A K Q 8 7 3 2 E  J 10 5
S
 —  K 10 5 4
 A986
 9873
 9
 A987

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Aasand Brogeland
1 pass 1
2 2 3 dbl
3 4 dbl all pass

A total of 380 pairs entered the 2003 European mixed pairs and 52 made it through
to the final, including Boye and his partner Tonje Aasand (later to become his wife).
South rather overstated her values with the double of 3, which is usually played as
a game try, and ended in 4 doubled by Boye in the East seat.
What did you decide to lead from the West hand? No one can blame you if
you lay down a top diamond. One diamond trick, one club and two hearts will put
the contract one down doubled and +200 will score well. Tonje liked the odds that
Boye would hold the J, after his raise, and led the 2!
Her bravery was rewarded when Boye’s 10 won the first trick. Boye returned
the 4, ruffed by West. Declarer ruffed the next diamond — low to the J — but
could not avoid the subsequent loss of two trump tricks and one club. That was
two down for a penalty of 500, giving the Norwegian pair 42 matchpoints out of a
possible 50. They eventually finished in 15th place.
Back to Question

8 Opening Leads — Inspired and Uninspired | 101

 12.
E-W Vul.  K Q 3 2 2008 Euro Championship
Dealer East  10 9 5 Norway - Germany
 AKQ32
 A
 J 10 9 5 4  A6
 6 4 N  AKQ
 10 9 5 W E  J8764
S
 J96  Q72
 87
 J8732
 —
 K 10 8 5 4 3

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Lindqvist Smirnov Brogeland Piekarek
1NT 2
pass 4 dbl all pass

South’s 2 showed hearts and a minor suit. What sort of hand does partner hold for
his penalty double of the resultant 4? He is likely to hold either three trump tricks
and one outside winner or perhaps two trump tricks and two outside winners. The
best opening lead is therefore a trump. Partner can win and then cash his outside
winner(s) before declarer has a chance to take any discards. It is possible also that
a trump lead will prevent declarer from scoring some ruffs in the dummy.
Espen Lindqvist led the J instead. As you see, a diamond or club lead would
have been fatal, allowing declarer to discard his two spade losers and then establish
the clubs with a ruff. The spade lead did not suffer this fate because it hit partner’s
ace. Indeed, it put the contract two down! Boye won the dummy’s K with the A
and drew three rounds of trumps, switching to a club. Declarer could discard three
clubs on the AKQ but this still left him with a club loser.
If Espen had led a trump, as we recommend, the contract would have gone
only one down. After drawing three rounds of trumps, Boye would have to take
his A (setting up the KQ for a fourth club discard) to prevent declarer from
discarding his spades.
‘Shouldn’t you lead a trump, partner?’
‘We needed the 300!’

Back to Question

102 | Bridge at the Edge

 9
Slam Adventures
Back in Chapter 2 we looked at the main mechanisms for bidding potential slam
hands. Now we will see some more slam deals from championship play, looking at
further bidding methods as we go.
Have you ever made a cuebid based on a queen? It doesn’t happen often, it’s
true, but the possibility can arise when a player has already denied first- or second-
round control in a suit.

Both Vul.  10 9 7 3 2006 Norwegian Pairs final

Dealer West  10 6 3 Lillehammer
 A K 10 5
 Q 10
 Q 8  KJ652
 9 5 2 N  J7
 Q 8 4 3 2 W E  J9
S
 763  J982
 A4
 AKQ84
 76
 AK54

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Stabell
pass pass pass 2
pass 2NT pass 3
pass 4 pass 4
pass 5 pass 6
all pass

Boye’s 2NT response showed positive values and a balanced hand. His subsequent
4 was a cuebid passing these messages: (1) I have a heart fit and I’m interested in a
slam, (2) I hold the A or K, (3) I do not hold the A, K, A or K; otherwise I
would have cuebid in one of the black suits instead. What a wealth of information
from just one bid!
Leif-Erik Stabell made a similar cuebid in spades and Boye then bid 5. What
could this possibly mean? Since he had already denied the A and K, he could
only be showing the Q. South could place his partner with the K in addition, to
make up the original 2NT response, and therefore leapt to a small slam.

9 Slam Adventures | 103

 A club was led to the ten, jack and king. Declarer played the A, Q and K,
East’s J appearing. A club ruff in dummy was then his twelfth trick.
Is the ‘Leaping Michaels’ convention safely installed in your system? Boye and
Erik Sælensminde made good use of it on this deal:

Neither Vul.  A K 5 2006 Euro Championship

Dealer East  A K 9 8 5 Norway - Italy
 AQ962
 —
 J 9 8 6 3 2  Q
 2 N  J7
 7 W E  10 8 5 4 3
S
 K9652  AQJ73
 10 7 4
 Q 10 6 4 3
 KJ
 10 8 4

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Fantoni Sælensminde Nunes Brogeland
pass pass
2 4 pass 4
dbl rdbl pass 5
pass 6 pass 6
pass 7 all pass

A natural jump overcall of 4 (or 4) is

Leaping Michaels
not very useful over a weak-two in a major.
Over an opening bid of 2 or When you play Leaping Michaels, 4 shows
2, an overcall of 4 or 4 a strong two-suiter in diamonds and the
shows a strong two-suiter in the other major. How should Boye respond on
bid minor and the other major. the South cards, do you think?
So, jumping to 4 over an Only six points in the South hand,
opponent’s 2 shows a heart- yes, but they represent a magnificent fit
club two-suiter. Over a natural for the suits that North has indicated.
opening bid of 2, 4 would Boye therefore responded 4, bidding the
show both major suits. opponent’s suit to show slam possibilities.
Some players also use West doubled, meaning in his system
non-leaping Michaels, where that he did not want a spade lead. Erik
4/4 over an opposing Sælensminde then redoubled to indicate his
preempt of 3 would show spade control and interest in a slam. Boye,
clubs/hearts and diamonds/ who had already bid his moderate hand
hearts respectively. strongly, applied the brakes in 5. Erik

104 | Bridge at the Edge

persisted with a grand-slam try of 6 and Boye was then willing to cuebid his high
card in diamonds. This was sufficient encouragement for Erik to bid the grand
slam, which was easily made. A fine auction!
At the other table Lauria and Versace stopped in 5, albeit after vigorous
preemption from Helgemo and Helness. Only five pairs reached the grand slam in
the open section of the European championship.
When the bidding is already inconveniently high, it is sometimes impossible to
check that you do not have two top losers. You hear players saying: ‘I couldn’t risk
bidding a slam; we might have had two top club losers.’ It is easy enough to avoid
responsibility in that way. When a slam can be made, however, you may still lose
a double-figure number of IMPs.
Boye faced the possibility of two top spade losers on this deal:

E-W Vul.  J 10 6 2 2010 Vanderbilt

Dealer South  A K Q J 3 Lynch - Strul
 63
 QJ
 Q 9 7  AK543
 5 2 N  10 9 8 6 4
 10 8 7 5 2 W E  Q4
S
 743  10
 8
 7
 AKJ9
 AK98652

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Grøtheim Brogeland Gromov Sælensminde
1
pass 1 1 2
pass 2 pass 5
pass 5 pass 5NT
pass 6 all pass

How would you react on the North cards over the surprising leap to 5?
A cautious performer (not that Boye has ever been called that) might think that
there could be two top spade losers. Boye reasoned that his partner had suggested
4-7 shape in the minor suits and the odds were high that he did not hold two spade
losers. This was reason enough to raise to 6 and many players would have found
that bid. Boye went the extra mile and cuebid 5 in the search for a grand slam! If
his partner were then to cuebid 5, showing a void spade, it was possible that seven
clubs, five hearts and the diamond ace would allow 7 to be made.

9 Slam Adventures | 105

 Boye’s intention was to bid 5NT over 5 from partner, suggesting a grand slam.
His partner in fact bid 5NT himself, carrying the message: ‘I do not hold a first-
round spade control, but I am otherwise great for a grand slam.’ Knowing that there
was a loser in spades, Boye completed a splendid auction by bidding 6.
There was some interest in the play. Andrey Gromov won the spade lead and
switched to the 10, won in the dummy. Erik played the Q, to check for a 4-0
break. When both defenders followed, he played the AK and ruffed a diamond
with the J. The fall of East’s Q meant that he could return to hand, draw trumps
and claim the slam.
Suppose partner opens 2NT and you have a major single-suited hand that may
produce a slam. How do you pass this message to your partner? If you start with a
three-level transfer bid, you may find yourself with no good bid on the next round.
One solution is to use ‘two-below transfer bids’ at the four-level. With a long spade
suit, for example, you can bid 4. Boye and Erik Sælensminde made good use of
the method here:

N-S Vul.  AK97654 2007 Bermuda Bowl final

Dealer South  5 2 Norway - USA
 J43
 6
 J 8 2  10 3
 A 10 9 4 N  8763
 Q 5 W E  10 6
S
 9832  KQ754
 Q
 KQJ
 AK9872
 A J 10

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Rosenberg Brogeland Zia Sælensminde
2NT
pass 4 pass 4
pass 5 dbl rdbl
pass 5 pass 6
all pass

Erik Sælensminde decided to open 2NT. This was not so much because he feared
1 being passed out, more that it would be difficult to express his hand after any
response to 1. Boye held a great hand for two-below transfers. A response of 3
would have been a standard transfer to 3, showing at least five spades. His actual
response of 4 was a slam try based on a spade suit of at least six cards. Partner
could then show interest in a slam by bidding 4. Since Erik held only a singleton
Q, he signed off in 4.

106 | Bridge at the Edge

 Boye rated his hand as worth another
move and continued with a cuebid of 5. Two-below transfer bids
When Zia made a lead-directing double, Opposite 2NT (or 2–2–
Erik redoubled to show a first-round club 2NT), four-level responses
control. With a couple of slam invitations show a slam try and at least a
already made, Boye had no more to say six-card suit:
and signed off in 5. Placing his partner
4 – slam try in hearts
with very good spades and a singleton club,
Erik then bid the small slam, which was an 4 – slam try in spades
easy make when trumps broke 3-2. This 4 – slam try in clubs
was worth 12 IMPs when Ralph Katz and
4 – slam try in diamonds
George Jacobs demonstrated the potential
problems of opening 1 on the South cards. When the opener is slam-
They stopped in game after the auction: suitable, he makes the in-
1 - 1 - 3NT. between bid (4 over 4).
(Amusingly for Boye, it was Zia who
originally taught him the ‘two-below transfer’
method, when they were partners in the 2000 Denmark v. Rest of the World match
in Odense.)
Let’s look at something different. What does it mean when you follow a
Stayman inquiry with a 3 or 3 bid? One good method is that these bids should
be natural and forcing to game. Look at this deal:

N-S Vul.  A J 9 2000 Bermuda Bowl

Dealer North  A K 8 7 Norway - Brazil
 A982
 87
 K 10 6 3  842
 9 6 N  10 5 4 3 2
 J 7 W E  63
S
 Q6543  K 10 2
 Q75
 QJ
 K Q 10 5 4
 AJ9

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Chagas Brogeland Branco Sælensminde
1NT pass 2
pass 2 pass 3
pass 3 pass 3NT
pass 4 pass 4NT
pass 5 dbl 6
all pass

9 Slam Adventures | 107

Boye’s 1NT showed 15-17 points and the South hand, packed with queens and jacks
(over-valued by the point-count system) was only just good enough to visualize a
slam. Erik Sælensminde decided to show his diamond suit and therefore began
with Stayman even though he did not hold a four-card major. His subsequent 3
was natural and forcing to game. With no particular fit for diamonds, North would
have signed off in 3NT. His actual 3 showed a diamond fit and was encouraging.
What should South do next, do you think?
The fact that South had introduced a
Bidding a minor via Stayman minor suit implied that his hand was good
enough to contemplate an eleven- or twelve-
Even if you play four-suit trick contract. With a minimum hand in this
transfers (where you can show context and a lack of controls, Erik suggested
a six-card minor via a transfer) stopping in 3NT despite the diamond fit.
it is worth playing that 3 or Boye’s hand was splendidly rich in controls,
3 via Stayman is natural and not to mention his four-card diamond support
forcing to game. The opener and a ruffing value in clubs. He continued
can cuebid to show a good fit, with a cuebid of 4 and Erik advanced to the
otherwise sign off in 3NT. small slam. Brazil’s Campos and Villas Boas
matched this successful contract at the other
table.
Suppose you open 1 and the next player overcalls 4. Most pairs would treat
4NT by the responder as showing the minor suits rather than asking for keycards
in hearts. Boye and Erik used 4NT with this meaning on a slightly different auction
here:
Neither Vul.  A 7 2007 Bermuda Bowl
Dealer South  J 7 6 Norway - Sweden
 A96
 A7632
 K Q J 8 6 5 4 3  9
 K N  10 9 4
 Q 8 2 W E  J 10 7 5 4 3
S
 9  Q84
 10 2
 AQ8532
 K
 K J 10 5

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Bertheau Brogeland Nyström Sælensminde
1
4 dbl pass 4NT
pass 5NT pass 6
all pass

108 | Bridge at the Edge

Boye’s double of 4 is described as ‘negative’ on the convention card. It is not for
penalties, but partner is entitled to pass on a flattish hand with little potential for a
contract at the five-level or higher.
Erik had some shape opposite and was happy to play the hand, rather than
defend. His 4NT rebid passed the message: ‘I have (at least) two places to play’. In
other words, he could see two possible trump suits. With five or six hearts and five
clubs, he would have rebid 5 instead. The inference to be drawn was that South’s
second suit contained only four cards.
If Boye was merely interested in playing at the five-level in the best fit, he
would bid 5 next. Should South then advance to 5, announcing that he held
both red suits, the bidding could come to a halt in 5.
Holding three aces, Boye visualized a slam. When he continued with a pick-a-
slam 5NT, Erik bid 6 and this concluded the auction. How would you play the
club slam when West leads the Q?
Erik won with the A and played a diamond to the king. Since West held
many more spades than his partner, it was clear to finesse East for the Q. (The
odds between playing for the drop and finessing are fairly close even when there
was no adverse bidding. With West holding long spades, the odds swing hugely
in favor of a finesse against East.) When Erik led the 10 from his hand, the 9
appeared from West and he won with dummy’s ace. After throwing his spade loser
on dummy’s A, Erik finessed the J successfully. He then drew East’s last trump
and played the A, preparing to set up the hearts. The K fell from West and he
had an overtrick.
Suppose the trump finesse had unexpectedly lost to Q9 with West. What
then? Because of Erik’s unblock of the 10 on the first round, he would have been
able to reach dummy with the 7 to take the percentage play in hearts: a finesse
of the queen.
Most partnerships have plenty of system to guide them towards a major-suit
game or slam facing a 2NT opening (or a start of 2 - 2 - 2NT). It can be a different
matter when the responder holds length in the minor suits. What sequences do
you have at your disposal?
One method is to use a 3 response to show both minors, while 4 and 4
are natural and show a suit of at least six cards. (If you play two-below transfer
responses, which we mentioned a few pages back, you use 4 and 4 to show the
single-suiters in a minor.)
Erik Sælensminde had to judge how strongly to bid a minor two-suiter on this
deal:

9 Slam Adventures | 109

 Neither Vul.  A Q 2004 Euro Championship
Dealer North  A 10 5 Norway - Serbia/Montenegro
 A Q 10 7
 AK42
 K 10 6  J9743
 K 9 7 6 3 N  QJ42
 9 8 4 2 W E  6
S
 6  J87
 852
 8
 KJ53
 Q 10 9 5 3

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Sælensminde
2 pass 2
pass 2NT pass 3
pass 4 pass 4
pass 4NT pass 5
pass 6 pass 7
all pass

Boye’s 2NT promised 22-24 points and Erik

Showing the minors Sælensminde’s 3 showed both minors.
opposite 2NT Boye’s 4 set the trump suit and 4 was a
When partner opens 2NT (or cuebid. RKCB revealed that South held the
opens 2 and rebids 2NT), it  K and Boye now had a grand slam in his
works well to use 3 to show sights. After partner’s heart cuebid he had
both minor suits. Partner can no heart losers; the Q could be discarded if
rebid 3NT with no good fit for partner held five clubs headed by the queen.
your suits. He passed this message by bidding 6.
It took some courage to bid a grand slam
on the 6 points that South held. Erik looked
favorably at his J, however, and at his productive club holding. Partner’s grand-
slam try implied that all six keycards were present; he must also hold the K or he
would have asked for that card by bidding 5NT. Erik duly bid 7 and made the
contract easily. He scored two heart ruffs in his hand and discarded dummy’s Q
on the fifth club. A few pairs elsewhere bid the grand slam in clubs, surviving when
the spade finesse proved successful.
On the next deal, the last of a closely-fought match, a bucketful of IMPs turned
on the play of one defensive card. Additional pressure was on the players because
the tournament director was hovering, trying to assess who had been responsible
for the slow play and a late finish.

110 | Bridge at the Edge

 E-W Vul.  8 6 2 2009 Bermuda Bowl
Dealer West  A J 9 6 5 Norway - Netherlands
 62
 A 10 9
 K 5 3  J 10
 K 10 7 4 N  Q82
 Q J 7 W E  10 8 4 3
S
 432  J875
 AQ974
 3
 AK95
 KQ6

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

de Wijs Lindqvist Muller Brogeland
pass pass pass 1
pass 2 pass 3
pass 3NT pass 4
pass 4 pass 5NT
pass 6 all pass

Espen Lindqvist’s 2, on a passed hand, showed 8-11 points and three-card spade
support. Boye’s 3 was a splinter bid and 3NT showed slam interest. After two
cuebids, Boye’s 5NT carried the pick-a-slam meaning, just in case North had a good
diamond suit. Our question for you on this deal is: after a lead of the Q would
you expect the slam to succeed or not?
Boye won with the A, cashed the K and ruffed a diamond with the 8. He
then led a trump, the 10 appearing from East. At double-dummy the slam can be
made by rising with the A on this trick. You can then lead your last diamond and
West cannot ruff effectively because he would have to use his K to beat dummy’s
6. This happens to work only because East’s 10 is from J10 rather than from
K10, also because East holds the outstanding 10 (which could easily lie with
West after his Q lead).
Boye played with the odds when he finessed the Q on the first round of
trumps, hoping that East had started with K10. The finesse lost to West’s K
and all now depended on the return that Simon de Wijs made. A trump return
would prevent declarer from ruffing his last diamond and kill the slam. With the
tournament director making his presence known, de Wijs extracted a trump from
his hand. The tournament director consulted his watch, yet again. De Wijs pushed
the trump back into his hand and switched to a heart! Boye won with dummy’s A,
crossed to his hand and ruffed his last diamond successfully. He was then able to
draw trumps and the slam was made. Norway gained 11 IMPs instead of losing 11
IMPs and had some insurance against a possible slow-play fine!

9 Slam Adventures | 111

 Bridge writers often debate the pros and cons of presenting deals in two-hand
format initially, rather than four-hand format. Of the present authors, Boye likes
to start by showing two hands — simulating conditions at the table — while David
has always preferred the four-hand format (which consumes less space and can be
easier to follow). Test yourself on this grand slam, presented in two-hand format.

 AQ74
 AJ82
 Q3
 AK9

 3
 K65
 AKJ7
 Q 10 5 4 3

How will you play 7 when West leads the 2?

A successful finesse in either major suit would bring a thirteenth trick. You
might also try to drop the missing honor in one major before finessing in the other.
Or is there a different way to play the slam? Over to you!
When you have decided on your line of play, look at the complete deal:

Both Vul.  A Q 7 4 2000 Nordic Championship

Dealer South  A J 8 2 Norway - Sweden
 Q3
 AK9
 K J 9 8 2  10 6 5
 10 9 4 N  Q73
 8 6 4 W E  10 9 5 2
S
 82  J76
 3
 K65
 AKJ7
 Q 10 5 4 3

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Nyström Brogeland Strömberg Sælensminde
1
pass 1 pass 2
pass 2NT pass 3
pass 4 pass 4
pass 4NT pass 5
pass 5 pass 7
all pass

112 | Bridge at the Edge

Boye’s 2NT asked for distributional information and 3 showed the 1-3-4-5 shape.
Clubs were agreed as trumps and RKCB revealed the one keycard (the A) that
Boye was missing. The 5 continuation asked for the Q and invited a grand slam.
Erik Sælensminde held two side-suit kings in addition to the trump queen. Since
he had limited his hand with the 2 rebid, he was happy to leap to 7.
Erik won the trump lead in his hand, crossed to the A and ruffed a spade.
When he played a trump to the ace he was pleased to see the suit breaking 3-2. In
that case he could proceed with his intended plan — a dummy reversal!
A second spade ruff was followed by a diamond to the queen and a third spade
ruff. A heart to the ace allowed declarer to draw East’s last trump and three more
rounds of diamonds then provided a parking place for dummy’s two potential heart
losers. Did you spot the dummy reversal when shown only the North and South
hands? For some strange reason, it is an easy play to miss.
Well, that seemed to work all right. (Perhaps Boye’s idea is not so bad.) Let’s
go mad and use two-deal format for the next deal too:

N-S Vul.  7 2010 Buffett Cup

Dealer North  A 10 8 2 Europe - USA
 KQJ8
 A Q 10 6

 A8
 KQ5
 A943
 7543

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Hampson Hackett Rodwell Brogeland
1 pass 1
2 3 4 5NT
pass 6 all pass

Boye, who was partnering Justin Hackett in the individual segment of the event,
will take up the narrative:

I was worth a slam after partner’s 3 and my 5NT was pick-a-slam, asking
partner to choose a minor suit. West’s lead against the diamond slam
was the K. How would you play?
Your instinct, as mine, is probably to pull the opponents’ trumps and
then take the double hook in clubs. With a 3-2 trump break and divided
club honors that plan is as good as any, but what if trumps are 4-1? In
that case you can’t afford to pull trumps immediately, as you need to ruff
a spade in dummy as well as tackling the club suit.

9 Slam Adventures | 113

 To cater for a 4-1 trump split, you should go after clubs right away. I
led a low club at Trick 2, planning to insert dummy’s 10. West followed
with the K on the first round and I won with dummy’s ace. It was time
to check the trump break by playing the KQ and East pitched a spade on
the second round. How would you continue?
Unless the K was a falsecard from KJ or Kx, you pretty much
have the whole distribution figured out now. The bidding suggests that
spades are 6-4, so West has 6-2-4-1 shape, leaving East with 4-4-1-4.
If East has Jxxx as well as his Jxxx, you can still make the slam with
careful play. You may look at all four hands before planning the endplay:

 7
 A 10 8 2
 KQJ8
 A Q 10 6
 K Q 6 5 4 2  J 10 9 3
 7 4 N  J963
 10 7 5 2 W E  6
S
 K  J982
 A8
 KQ5
 A943
 7543

The early play in 6 was a spade lead to the ace and a club to the king and
ace, the KQ then revealing the 4-1 trump break.
After this start I crossed to my hand with the K, ruffed the spade
loser and cashed the J. Returning to hand with the Q, I drew West’s
last trump and pitched a club from dummy. Eric Rodwell, sitting East, had
to throw one club and his last spade — otherwise I would score my twelfth
trick in either hearts or clubs. With four cards left, this was the situation:

 —
 A 10
 —
 Q 10
 Q 6 5 4  —
 — N  J9
 — W E  —
S
 —  J9
 —
 5
 —
 754

114 | Bridge at the Edge

 In a competition like the Buffett Cup, with the very best players from
Europe and the USA battling for glory, there was no point in playing the
hand out. An endplay in either hearts or clubs would work, and all four
players around the table knew what was going on. Eric Rodwell put his
hand back in the slot and I had my +1370.

We will end the chapter with two truly spectacular deals. On the first one, the
Icelandic South player picks up an all-black hand:

Neither Vul.  A 3 1996 Euro Juniors

Dealer South  A Q 10 3 Norway - Iceland
 A K 10 9 7 6
 7
 Q 5 2  64
 K J 9 8 7 6 5 N  42
 5 W E  QJ8432
S
 Q4  J 10 9
 K J 10 9 8 7
 —
 —
 AK86532

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Saur Baldursdottir Brogeland Johannson
1
3 pass pass 4
pass 5 pass 5NT
pass 6 all pass

Ljosbra Baldursdottir passed on the first round, licking her lips at the prospects of
partner re-opening with a double. It was not to be. South rebid 4 to show a big
two-suiter. North announced her strength with a cuebid and South’s 5NT then
asked partner to ‘pick a slam’. What would you have bid on the North cards?
6NT would not be a clever move. North appreciated the need to play the hand
with a trump suit and opted for 6. Saur led his singleton diamond to the 10 and
J, Stefan Johannson ruffing in his hand. When declarer continued with ace, king
and another trump, Boye was endplayed! A heart or diamond return into dummy’s
tenace would give declarer four spade discards, saving him the spade guess. Boye
chose to return a spade, a defense that would have succeeded if West held Q10x.
With declarer’s actual spade holding, he was again saved the spade guess and the
slam was made.

9 Slam Adventures | 115

 Not wishing to end the chapter on an anti-climax, after the massive South hand
we have just seen, we will look at a deal where Boye picked up an all-red hand.
Not only that, both suits were headed by the ace-king. How would you have bid
such a monster?

Both Vul.  — 2003 Life Master Pairs

Dealer North  A K 8 7 6 5 2 Philadelphia
 A K 10 9 8 6
 —
 A Q 9 7 6 3  K4
 J 10 9 N  Q3
 J 5 W E  2
S
 10 5  AKJ97643
 J 10 8 5 2
 4
 Q743
 Q82

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Forrester
1 2 pass
2 3 4 dbl
pass 6 pass 7
all pass

An opening bid of 2 would not be right on the North cards. You can expect heavy
intervention and it is essential to mention your suits as soon as possible. Boye
opened with a simple 1 and the opponents did indeed enter the auction. At his
second turn he showed a giant hand with his 3 bid. At this stage Forrester was
unimpressed with the contribution that his hand might make as the dummy. He
indicated this by doubling East’s 4 bid.
Boye was not finished, of course. One possibility was to leap to 6 at his next
turn, but this would not pass the message that a grand slam was possible. Boye
chose the amazing bid of 6. This was clearly a grand slam try and had to be
based on a red two-suiter. Forrester not only read the message, he realized that
his four-card diamond support would allow declarer to establish the heart suit.
He completed a glittering auction with a leap to 7, which was easily made. How
often do you see the trump suit for a grand slam named for the first time at the
seven-level?

116 | Bridge at the Edge

 10
Delayed Heart Attack

Sometimes you pick up a hand that looks nothing special initially. As the bidding
progresses, you begin to realize that your cards have real potential. Competing in
the 1996 European Under-26 Championship (an event that Norway eventually
won), Boye picked up these cards in the South seat:

 J  K 7 5 4 3 2  K 3  10 7 6 5

East opened 1, showing at least four clubs. With only his side vulnerable, Boye
decided to pass. West responded 2, an inverted raise that showed club support
and good values. How would you react to the situation when East rebids 2,
showing a shortage in hearts?

10 Delayed Heart Attack | 117

 You may think that you still hold a rather drab 7-point hand, but look how
much the bidding has told you. West did not respond 1, so he will hold at most
three hearts facing East’s singleton or void heart. You therefore know that your
partner has a minimum of three-card support for your hearts. The opponents’
bidding has also told you that partner has at most one club. In short, the odds look
good for a heart contract your way!
By now you must be expecting that Boye bid 3 at this stage. Er… no,
remember that it was a junior event. He actually went all the way and bid 4.
Have you ever seen such an amazing bid? This was the full deal:

N-S Vul.  A 8 7 6 3 1996 Euro Juniors

Dealer East  10 9 6 Cardiff, Wales
 Q854
 8
 K 10 5  Q942
 A Q J N  8
 J 6 2 W E  A 10 9 7
S
 Q942  AKJ3
 J
 K75432
 K3
 10 7 6 5

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Saur Brogeland
1 pass
2 pass 2 4 (!)
dbl all pass

West led the 2 and dummy went down with two useful cards but disappointing
trumps. East won with the K and returned his singleton trump. West defended
strongly now, winning with the J and continuing with the A and Q. This
sacrificed a trump trick, yes, but it prevented declarer from ruffing two clubs in the
dummy. Boye lost two trumps, the A and four club tricks for a penalty of 1100.
At the other table his teammates picked up +460 in 3NT.
Some twelve years later, in the 2008 European Championships in Pau, Norway
faced the Czech Republic. With only the opponents vulnerable, Boye picked up
this South hand:

118 | Bridge at the Edge

  A Q 10 6  K J 8 7 2  10 8 2  9

West opened 1, Espen Lindqvist passed and East responded 1. Would you find
a bid on that hand?
Boye is always on the lookout for lead-directing overcalls but here the heart suit
was not particularly good. If the opponents stopped low, he would have another
chance later. He passed.
West rebid 2 and East bid 2, an artificial game-try. Are you tempted to bid
on Boye’s hand now?
West could still hold hearts over him, so it was no less dangerous to bid than
before. Boye passed again and this was the situation at his next turn:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Vozabal Lindqvist Slemr Boye
1 pass 1 pass
2 pass 2 pass
3 pass pass ?

The final chance to bid on the South cards had arrived. What would your decision
have been?
Perhaps you are surprised even to see a ‘?’ in the South column. How could it
be right to pass twice and then put your head on the block with a bid of 3? It’s true
that West cannot now hold four hearts and he has declined the game invitation, but
surely any possible gain from bidding is outweighed by the chance of conceding a
big penalty?
Some players may talk with the angels. Boye sometime feels that he has a
good dialogue with the cards. On one occasion (don’t laugh, it’s true…) the jack
of diamonds actually winked at him. At such moments the rational mind has to
take second place. Boye dug halfway into his bidding box and extracted the cards
for a 3 bid.
Memories of Cardiff 1996 came flooding back when West doubled. What
would Geir Helgemo have to say when scores were compared and Boye had to
announce minus 500 or worse on their card?
This was the complete deal:

10 Delayed Heart Attack | 119

 E-W Vul.  942 2008 European Championship
Dealer West  A 10 Norway - Czech Republic
 K653
 8752
 7  KJ853
 Q 6 4 N  953
 Q 7 4 W E  AJ9
S
 A K Q 10 6 3  J4
 A Q 10 6
 KJ872
 10 8 2
 9

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Vozabal Lindqvist Slemr Brogeland
1 pass 1 pass
2 pass 2 pass
3 pass pass 3 (!)
dbl all pass

West began with the AK, East following twice. How would you play the contract?
Boye ruffed the second club and paused to consider the lie of the trump suit.
West had denied four hearts with his 3 rebid and had then doubled 3. It seemed
that he would hold Qxx. Boye finessed the 10 successfully and cashed the A.
When he led dummy’s 9, East covered with the jack and the queen was finessed
successfully. The K drew the defenders’ last two trumps and it was time for some
work on the diamond suit.
How did the diamonds lie? East was marked with 5-3-3-2 shape and had so
far shown up with only 5 points in the black suits. To justify his game-try on the
second round he should hold at least AJx. If West held the remaining Qxx, this
would give him another value to justify his penalty double of the final contract. The
9 was the critical card. If West held Q94, nothing could be done — unless West
had a brainstorm and forgot to insert the 9 on the first round, allowing dummy’s
6 to be played. What if East held AJ9? Ah, then declarer would be in business!
Boye led the 8 from his hand and was rewarded by the sight of West playing
low. East won with the 9 and returned the 5. Nothing could be gained by
finessing the 6 at this stage and Boye won with the 10. When he played his last
two trumps, the Czech East player had to make a final discard from K85 AJ. His
choice was a spade and Boye continued with ace and another spade, forcing East to
concede a trick to dummy’s K.
What was the effect of all this? Nine tricks, a fine 730 in the plus column and
(more importantly) all memories of Cardiff were extinguished!

120 | Bridge at the Edge

 11
Technical Mastery

In this chapter we will see some impressive examples of cold-blooded technical

cardplay, an important attribute of any top performer. We begin with another
memory from Boye’s early days in the game. In 1994 he played in his first teams
final, eventually losing on a split tie. Boye was disappointed not to receive the ‘best
played hand’ award for this deal:

N-S Vul.  A 9 1994 Moi Rana Teams

Dealer East  10 9 8 2 Norway
 A8654
 73
 Q J 7  10 8 4 3
 A 6 5 N  K4
 10 9 7 3 2 W E  KJ
S
 10 9  J8642
 K652
 QJ73
 Q
 AKQ5

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Aa Rasmussen Grøtheim Brogeland
pass 2
pass 2NT pass 3NT
pass 4 all pass

Boye and his partner were experimenting with Precision Club in those days and the
2 opening showed around 11-15 points with short diamonds. 2NT was a relay
bid and 3NT showed a maximum with 4-4-1-4 shape. Terje Aa found the only lead
to trouble the heart game, a low trump. How would you play the contract when the
defenders persist with two further rounds of trumps?
Boye unblocked a trump honor from his hand on the second round and won
the third round in the dummy. He then led a low diamond, to rectify the count for
a possible squeeze ending. East won with the K and switched to a club, declarer

11 Technical Mastery | 121

winning with the ace. Boye crossed to the A and ruffed a low diamond in his
hand. (He did not cash the A first because this was his intended squeeze card.)
He then played the K and ruffed a spade, isolating the spade guard in the East
hand. These cards remained:

 —
 —
 A86
 7
 —  10
 — N  —
 10 9 W E  —
S
 10 9  J86
 6
 —
 —
 KQ5

The A squeezed East in the black suits, completing a well-timed hand.

Just five years later Boye and his partner, Espen Erichsen, had reached the big
time. They were in Las Vegas, playing alongside Brazilian maestro, Gabriel Chagas
and the one and only Zia Mahmood. Boye made an excellent technical play on this
deal:
E-W Vul.  Q 9 8 7 1999 Cavendish Teams
Dealer South  10 7 5 2 Las Vegas, Nevada
 AQ7
 85
 5  10 6 3
 K Q J 6 4 N  A83
 3 2 W E  KJ654
S
 QJ732  10 9
 AKJ42
 9
 10 9 8
 AK64

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Goldman Erichsen Soloway Brogeland
1
pass 2 pass 3
pass 4 all pass

122 | Bridge at the Edge

Bobby Goldman led the K, winning the first trick, and switched to the Q. Boye
won and took a losing finesse of the Q. After winning the club return, he crossed
to the A and returned to his hand with the A. At this stage declarer needs to take
two ruffs in the dummy and cannot afford to be overruffed. The appearance of the
10 and 9 from East suggests that he might be short in the suit. How would you
continue the play?
Boye led a third round of clubs and discarded dummy’s last diamond. On any
return he could then ruff a diamond with a low trump and a club with the Q.
This technique is known as ‘trading ruffs’. You use a loser-on-loser play to swap a
dangerous club ruff for a safer diamond ruff.
Erik Sælensminde reached an ambitious grand slam on the next deal. Bidding
the grand was one thing — making it was another! Would you have seen the
required line of play?

Both Vul.  Q94 2002 European Championship

Dealer South  KQ73 Norway - Greece
 K5
 AK83
 K J 2  10 8 6 5
 10 8 N  542
 J 9 7 2 W E  10 6 4
S
 J976  10 4 2
 A73
 AJ96
 AQ83
 Q5

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Sælensminde
1NT
pass 2 pass 2
pass 3 pass 3
pass 4 pass 4NT
pass 5 pass 5NT
pass 6 pass 6
pass 7 all pass

At that time, Boye and Erik treated North’s 3 as forcing. Two cuebids followed
and Erik then bid RKCB, hearing of two keycards and the trump queen. 5NT asked
for kings and 6 showed the K. Now 6, the only available bid below six of the
trump suit, was Last Train for the grand slam. Boye does not like to accept second
prize on such deals and decided to bid the grand slam.
How would you play 7 when West leads the 8 to your 9?

11 Technical Mastery | 123

 Erik drew trumps in two further rounds. To bump the total to twelve tricks
(one short of the required target), he would have to ruff the fourth round of either
diamonds or clubs. Which should it be? Erik looked ahead to the end position he
would need, to conjure a thirteenth trick. His aim was to squeeze a defender who
held the K alongside the sole guard in one of the minor suits. If he played for a
spade-club squeeze, only West could be the victim. (East would sit over dummy’s
threat cards and could not be squeezed). If instead he played for a spade-diamond
squeeze, it would be possible to squeeze either opponent. It therefore followed that
he should preserve his diamond holding and take a ruff in the club suit!
Erik played three rounds of clubs, throwing a spade from his hand, and ruffed
a club with his last trump. He then played the A, a Vienna Coup to free the Q to
act as a threat against either opponent. A diamond to the dummy’s king left these
cards still to be played:
 Q9
 Q
 K5
 —
 K  10 8
 — N  —
 J 9 7 2 W E  10 6 4
S
 —  —
 7
 —
 AQ83
 —

Declarer called for the Q, discarding the 7 from his hand, and West had to
concede the thirteenth trick. Any overbidding could now be forgiven.
On the next deal the Chinese opponents attempted to make life difficult with
an unusual opening bid. The end effect was to push Boye into a playable game that
might otherwise not have been bid.

124 | Bridge at the Edge

 N-S Vul.  8 2 2007 Bermuda Bowl QF
Dealer East  Q Norway - China
 AQJ963
 J632
 9 7  Q 10 6 4
 K J 5 4 N  A 10 9 7 3
 K 8 7 4 W E  10 5
S
 K75  84
 AKJ53
 862
 2
 A Q 10 9

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Zhao Sælensminde Fu Brogeland
2 2
3 dbl pass 5
all pass

Fu Zhong’s 2 showed both major suits. When Boye overcalled 2 and Jack Zhao
raised to 3, Erik Sælensminde entered with a competitive double. This showed
both minor suits and a tolerance for spades (usually a doubleton). Boye could
place his partner with at most one heart, after the East-West bidding, and ended
the auction with a leap to 5.
East won the heart lead and shifted to a spade. Boye rose with the A and
finessed the Q successfully. He cashed the A, throwing a spade, and continued
with a spade to the king. Heart ruff, diamond ruff, heart ruff and another diamond
ruff left these cards still to be played:

 —
 —
 J9
 J6
 —  Q
 K N  10
 — W E  —
S
 K75  84
 J5
 —
 —
 AQ

11 Technical Mastery | 125

Needing three of the last four tricks, Boye led a spade. If West discards the K,
declarer will ruff with the 6, ruff a diamond with the A and lead his last spade,
certain to score another trump. West decided to ruff with the 7 rather than
discarding. Boye overruffed with the J and led a good diamond. East had to
ruff, to prevent declarer from throwing his last spade and endplaying West. Boye
overruffed with the Q and West’s K completed the trick.
At Trick 12, West had a choice of two losing cards to play. A trump would
allow Boye to win with the A and score a good spade. The K would let declarer
score his last two trumps separately
Look back to the full diagram for a moment. At the other table East did not
open and the Chinese pair bid 1 - 2 - 2 - 3, stopping there. It is difficult to
fault the auction but clubs were never mentioned.
The key move on the next deal, from the semi-final of a two-day Compact
Knockout event, was a subtle one. Would you have spotted it?

N-S Vul.  10 4 2 2008 Fall Nationals

Dealer East  K 8 4 Boston, Mass.
 Q 10 9 8 7 4
 6
 K J 9 6 5  AQ83
 Q 9 6 N  AJ
 — W E  J53
S
 10 9 7 5 3  J842
 7
 10 7 5 3 2
 AK62
 AKQ

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Lindqvist Brogeland
1 1
1 2 2 3
4 5 all pass

West leads a low spade to the ace and East persists with another spade. How would
you play the contract?
Boye ruffed the second spade and played the ace of trumps, West discarding
a spade. If declarer had followed with the 4 from dummy, he would have gone
down. As a matter of good technique, Boye unblocked dummy’s 7. This would
give him the option of a further trump entry to his hand with the 6.
Boye continued with three rounds of clubs, throwing two hearts from dummy.
After a heart to the king and ace, East returned the J. Boye ruffed this with
dummy’s 8, again preserving the 4. One more heart ruff would establish the

126 | Bridge at the Edge

suit. Boye returned to his hand by leading the 4 to his 6, taking the marked
finesse. He was then able to ruff a third round of hearts high and return to his king
of trumps to claim the remainder. (Note that East could not defeat the contract by
inserting the J on the second round of trumps, aiming to kill the 6 as an entry.
Declarer would then crossruff the remaining tricks with no risk of an overruff.)
You can see what would go wrong if declarer failed to unblock on the first
round of trumps. Whether he used the K or a spade ruff as the entry to his hand
for the second heart ruff, East’s J would be promoted.
You may not find Boye’s play of the next hand particularly impressive because
it was merely a matter of good timing. The fact remains that one of the USA’s top
players, with many Bermuda Bowl wins to his name, did not find the winning line.
We will describe the play up to the point where the two lines diverged. At that
stage, you can decide what you would have done next.

N-S Vul.  K 9 3 2001 Bermuda Bowl QF

Dealer South  10 6 4 2 Norway - Indonesia
 75
 KJ86
 7 5  QJ862
 A Q 5 N  97
 Q J 10 8 4 W E  932
S
 10 9 4  Q75
 A 10 4
 KJ83
 AK6
 A32

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Lasut Sælensminde Manoppo Brogeland
1
pass 2 pass 2NT
pass 4 all pass

Declarer won the Q lead, cashed the other top diamond and ruffed a diamond in
the dummy. A trump to the jack lost to West’s queen and West switched to the 7,
drawing East’s jack and declarer’s ace. Take South’s remaining cards now. What
will you do next?
Let’s see first how the USA declarer went down. He continued with a second
round of trumps and West rose with the ace, persisting with a second round of
spades. Declarer won with dummy’s king, drew the last trump and finessed the J.
The finesse lost and East cashed the setting trick in spades.
Foreseeing this ‘road to ruin’, Boye finessed the J immediately after winning
the first spade trick. The finesse lost but East could not play another spade from

11 Technical Mastery | 127

his side of the table. When he returned a club, Boye won with the ace and played
a second round of trumps. West rose with the A and switched back to spades but
Boye could then draw the last trump and discard his spade loser on the thirteenth
club.
There are not many matchpoint deals in this book, so make the most of the
next one. Look at all four hands and put yourself in declarer’s position, playing 4
on the lead of the Q.

Neither Vul.  8 6 3 2005 Bergen Pairs

Dealer North  A K 9 4 Norway
 A 10 8 3
 K8
 7 4  Q J 10 9
 Q 5 3 N  J7
 Q 6 5 2 W E  KJ74
S
 Q J 10 7  952
 AK52
 10 8 6 2
 9
 A643

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
1 pass 1
pass 2 pass 2NT
pass 4 all pass

You have an unavoidable trump loser, as the cards lie, and a seemingly certain
further loser in spades. Can you see any way that you might make twelve tricks for
a good pairs score?
Boye assessed it as a deal where you should try to make as many trump tricks
as possible. Since he wanted to ruff three diamonds in his hand, he preserved the
entries to dummy by winning the club lead with the ace. A diamond to the ace
was followed by a diamond ruff, a club to the king and another diamond ruff. A
trump to the ace allowed him to ruff dummy’s last diamond, everyone following.
Little could be lost by this sort of play; if a defender happened to overruff the fourth
diamond, this would often be at the expense of a natural trump trick.
A club ruff in dummy was followed by a second round of trumps. All followed
to the AK, leaving only two tricks to be played:

128 | Bridge at the Edge

  8
 9
 —
 —
 —  QJ
 Q N  —
 — W E  —
S
 J  —
 5
 —
 —
 6

In a way, the two original losers (one spade and one trump) were still intact. Boye
led the 6 and ruffed successfully with dummy’s 9. At Trick 13 West had to ruff
partner’s Q with the Q. Twelve tricks! Even if West’s last side-suit card had been
a spade, instead of a club, dummy’s 9 would have been promoted as a twelfth
trick.
Well, that’s amazing. You wait an age for a matchpoint deal and then two
arrive in a row. Take Boye’s cards here and test yourself on this one:

Both Vul.  9 8 7 2010 World Pairs final

Dealer East  K 10 9 7 4 3 Philadelphia
 6
 KJ7

 AK2
 A8
 QJ753
 Q54

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Wolpert Brogeland
pass 1NT
pass 4 pass 4
all pass

How would you play this heart game when West leads the Q?
It is Boye’s turn to tell you what happened at the table:

I start with one loser in each suit, and in trumps I could even get two
losers if it’s a 4-1 break. The task is to get rid of one of the losers and

11 Technical Mastery | 129

 surely that must be the one in spades. Somehow I must set up a diamond
trick, so I can discard a spade from dummy. How can that be done?
I should lead the single diamond from the dummy. If East rises with
the ace, which is perhaps more likely when defending at matchpoints than
in an IMPs game, I can take a ruffing finesse against West’s king.
Well, I am going to try that. I need to reach dummy to lead the 6. If
I play the ace and king of trumps, I will be short of entries to my hand, so I
make the better play of the 8 to dummy’s K. I lead dummy’s 6, hoping
to see the A appear from East. No, he plays an unhelpful 10. I cover
with the queen and West wins with the ace. West continues spades and I
win with the K. What now, do you think?
The only hope is that I can ruff out the K doubleton. East played the
10 on the first round; maybe he started with K10. It is not much of a
chance but it is all I have. I lead the 3 and — wonderful sight — the K
appears from West! He began with AK. I ruff in the dummy and return
to my A, both defenders following. I can now play the established J to
discard dummy’s last spade. No one ruffs with the top trump but it would
make no difference if they did. I lose just one trump and the minor-suit
aces to make the game.
This was the full layout:

 987
 K 10 9 7 4 3
 6
 KJ7
 Q J 10 6 3  54
 Q 6 N  J52
 A K W E  10 9 8 4 2
S
 A 10 9 6  832
 AK2
 A8
 QJ753
 Q54

When I look at the detailed scoresheet later, I see that some declarers
were favored with a top-diamond lead from West. It was easy for them
to set up a diamond trick with a ruffing finesse and then discard a spade
from the dummy. At the nine tables where West found the more awkward
lead of a spade, only four of the declarers managed to make the game.
They had to earn their money rather than just put it in their pocket!

We will next see a deal where decisions were to be made in both the bidding and
the play. Boye will describe the action:

130 | Bridge at the Edge

 Both Vul.  K 8 6 4 3 2001 Bermuda Bowl
Dealer North  A 7 3 Norway - Japan
 Q5
 652
 J 5  10 9 2
 5 N  Q 10 9 6 2
W
 A K J 10 7 3 2 E  4
S
 10 9 7  KQ83
 AQ7
 KJ84
 986
 AJ4

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
pass pass 1NT
pass 2 pass 2
pass 3NT pass 4
all pass

Should I pass 3NT or go to 4, playing in the 5-3 fit? Many players reckon
that it is better to play in 3NT in the long run. The main reason why I
decided to bid 4 was that the Japanese West had seemed keen to bid,
both over 1NT and 2. So I assumed he had a long diamond suit, which
might be cashing against 3NT.
Quite right! Lefty starts with AK against the spade game and East
discards a heart. How do you play when West continues with the J?
You need five spade tricks to have any hope of winning this contract.
Rather than ruffing, I pitch a losing club from dummy at Trick 3. West
switches to the 5, which goes to East’s queen and your king. What now?
East’s ready discard of a heart tells me that hearts are likely to be
5-1. Five spades, three hearts and the A leaves me one trick short. My
only chance is to find East with the KQ in addition to his heart guard. I
will then be able to squeeze him in hearts and clubs. I cash my A and pull
trumps to reach this ending, with the lead in dummy:

11 Technical Mastery | 131

  6
 A7
 —
 6
 —  —
 — N  10 9 6
 10 7 W E  —
S
 10 9  K
 —
 J84
 —
 J

When I play the 6, East shrugs his shoulders. He has to give up one of
the suits and I have a neat 620!

On the next deal Boye was partnering Rita Shugart of the USA. This was the layout:

N-S Vul.  A 5 2006 Vanderbilt

Dealer South  J 9 4 Dallas, Texas
 J86
 87543
 K Q J 9 2  10 8 7 3
 Q 7 6 2 N  K 10 8 5 3
 7 2 W E  KQ5
S
 96  Q
 64
 A
 A 10 9 4 3
 A K J 10 2

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Shugart Brogeland
1
2 pass 3 4
pass 5 all pass

How would you have played this contract when West leads the K?

132 | Bridge at the Edge

 You have one trick to lose in spades and therefore need to lose only one
diamond trick. Provided East holds at least one of the missing diamond honors,
you can succeed by taking two diamond finesses. There are only two entries to
dummy with which to take these finesses: the A and the 8. You should therefore
take one diamond finesse immediately after winning with the A. Does anything
else occur to you about the deal?
Boye considered the situation where West held a singleton K or Q. Suppose
he won the first trick with the A and ran the J, losing to a singleton honor. West
might be able to cross to the East hand with a spade and a diamond ruff would then
beat the contract! Once he had spotted this potential problem, it was easy to find a
remedy. To break communications between the West and East hand, Boye ducked
the opening lead. He won the spade continuation and led the J. Had this lost to
a singleton honor, all would have been well. There would have been no possibility
of a spade entry to the East hand.
As you see from the diagram, eleven tricks would have been made even if
declarer had won the first spade and drawn trumps, later relying on just one
diamond lead from dummy. Sometimes virtue must be its own reward!

11 Technical Mastery | 133

 12
Three Slams in Shanghai

With one sixteen-board set to be played in the final of the 2007 Bermuda Bowl,
contested in Shanghai, Norway led the USA by the considerable margin of 284-
207. Only a wild set of boards would give the Americans any chance at all of
closing the deficit. This was the third board:

E-W Vul.  K 9 8 3 2007 Bermuda Bowl final

Dealer South  3 Norway - USA
 73
 K98543
 6 5  QJ7
 Q 9 6 5 N  J874
 K Q 8 6 W E  10 9 5 4 2
S
 762  Q
 A 10 4 2
 A K 10 2
 AJ
 A J 10

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Helgemo Rosenberg Helness Zia
2
pass 2 pass 2NT
pass 3 pass 4
pass 4 pass 4
pass 4NT pass 5
pass 5 pass 5
pass 6 pass 6
all pass

Zia upgraded his hand into the 2 range. His 4 Stayman response showed four
cards in both majors and Rosenberg bid 4 to transfer into spades. Roman Keycard
Blackwood discovered that Zia held all four aces but not the queen of trumps.
Rosenberg offered 6 as an alternative contract but Zia went back to 6.

12 Three Slams in Shanghai | 135

 Zia won the K lead, drew one round of trumps with the ace and played two
top hearts to ditch dummy’s diamond loser. A trump to the king brought good
news on the break in that suit and the K then dropped the Q from East. +980
to the USA.
At the other table Boye opened 2NT and made twelve tricks in the spade game.
11 IMPs away.
Norway had lost two further big swings by the time the next slam arrived:

Both Vul.  A Q 10 9 6 4 2007 Bermuda Bowl final

Dealer East  7 3 Norway - USA
 9843
 5
 K 8 2  5
 — N  AKQJ9654
 7 6 5 2 W E  KQJ
S
 A K Q J 10 8  3
 J73
 10 8 2
 A 10
 97642

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Weinstein Sælensminde Garner Brogeland
2 pass
3 pass 3 pass
6 all pass

Boye was on lead, after East’s conventional opening. Since the opponents figured
to hold two long and strong suits, he had to look for quick tricks in the other suits.
His opening lead was the A, on which Erik played the 9. This was a reverse-
attitude discouraging signal. Knowing that there were no further tricks available
in diamonds, Boye switched to the 3. Sweet news arrived on this trick. Declarer
called despairingly for dummy’s K and Erik won with the A! Any fears of a
catastrophic final set that would snatch victory from Norway’s grasp could now
surely be put aside.
This was the auction at the other table:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Helgemo Rosenberg Helness Zia
2 pass
3 3 4 4
6 pass 6 all pass

136 | Bridge at the Edge

What should Zia lead, do you think? The situation was similar to that at the other
table: declarer had a great heart suit and dummy had a similarly powerful club suit.
Was it not clear to attempt to cash two tricks in the other two suits?
A spade lead would have beaten the contract; Rosenberg would surely switch
to a diamond, knowing from Zia’s raise that no further spade trick was available.
As at the other table, the A lead would receive a discouraging attitude signal and
a spade switch would then be obvious. What about a club lead? Declarer would
win with the A and, with no further entry to dummy available, would have to try
a second round of clubs to get his spade loser away. North would ruff the second
club, leaving declarer with losers in both spades and diamonds, so even a club lead
would beat the slam.
Zia led a trump.
The commentators on the internet site Bridge Base Online, David Bird among
them, could not fathom the rationale behind this lead. Tor Helness drew trumps
and ran the clubs for an overtrick. The Norwegians gained 17 IMPs and were now
49 IMPs ahead with only six boards to play.
The penultimate board of the match provided yet another slam opportunity:

N-S Vul.  9 7 6 2 2007 Bermuda Bowl final

Dealer South  J 8 5 4 Norway - USA
 83
 K85
 K Q 8 5  J
 9 N  A K Q 10 2
 Q J 5 W E  A K 10 7 6
S
 AJ432  Q 10
 A 10 4 3
 763
 942
 976

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Weinstein Sælensminde Garner Brogeland
pass
1 pass 1 pass
1 pass 2 pass
2NT pass 3 pass
3 pass 4 pass
4 pass 4 pass
5 pass 6 all pass

Steve Garner’s 1 response showed hearts and 2 was fourth-suit forcing. On the
fifth round of bidding, both players cuebid a singleton opposite a known suit in

12 Three Slams in Shanghai | 137

partner’s hand, which is a risky practice unless you know what you’re doing. The
bidding came to a halt in 6 and it was Boye to lead. What would your choice have
been from that South hand?
It was not attractive to lead the A since this would surely set up at least one
winner in dummy, perhaps allowing a club discard. West had implied a club
control with his grand-slam try of 5 and Boye led the 6 through West’s top card
in the suit. Garner had no alternative but to run the club lead. Erik Sælensminde
won with the K and returned a spade, putting the slam one down.
This was the bidding at the other table:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Helgemo Rosenberg Helness Zia
pass
1 pass 1 pass
1 pass 2 pass
2NT pass 3 pass
4 dbl pass pass
rdbl pass 4 pass
4 pass 4NT pass
5 pass 6NT all pass

Helgemo’s 4 agreed diamonds as trumps. When this cuebid was doubled by

Rosenberg, he redoubled to confirm first-round control. Seeing the danger of a
club lead against 6, Helness chose 6NT (which would be played by West) as the
final contract.
Rosenberg led the 7, Zia winning with the A and switching to a club.
Helgemo rose with the A and eventually finessed the 10 to make the slam. A
few minutes later, the final score was announced: Norway 324 - USA 245. The
Norwegians were world champions for the first time. What does it feel like to be a
world champion? Let Boye tell you:

Winning the Bermuda Bowl in 2007 was a dream coming true. Ever since
I was a kid, I wanted to become a world champion at something. I always
admired the best athletes in any sport, boxing and football being my
favorites, but I soon understood that I wouldn’t become a Muhammad
Ali or a Diego Maradona. In bridge, though, I felt I could compete at the
highest level, given some experience. I would hate to be forty and look back
at what could have been, so in my twenties I dedicated a lot of time to
become as good a bridge player as I could.
We played pretty well in the final, and going into the last segment the
USA needed a spectacular finish to beat us. They got off to a good start
while we had some shaky moments, but after beating a slam and banking a
couple of other good results, I knew we couldn’t lose. Leaving the table to

138 | Bridge at the Edge

meet the rest of the team I was covered with goose bumps. We had made
it; Norway’s first gold in the Bermuda Bowl.
It was a great win for Erik and me, as we had played less often in recent
years and knew that it could be our last chance to win the Bermuda Bowl
together. After the tournament we decided to call it a day since it sure
wouldn’t get better than this. Standing on the podium singing Queen’s ‘We
are the Champions’ and our national anthem ‘Ja, vi elsker’ truly was a high
in my bridge career.

12 Three Slams in Shanghai | 139

 Celebrating the Bermuda Bowl win in Shanghai, 2007.

With Zia Mahmood after their win in the Icelandair Open Pairs, 2003.
Boye becomes a World Grand Master by winning the Bermuda Bowl in
Shanghai, 2007 (L-R Tor Helness, Boye, Geir Helgemo).

Comparing scores at the Bermuda Bowl in São Paulo, 2009

(L-R Ulf Tundal, Glenn Grøtheim, Boye, Espen Lindqvist).
 With Ishmael Del’Monte after winning the IMP Pairs in St. Louis
(Spring Nationals 2007).

The winning Norwegian team, European Championships, 2008.

 13
Defend with Your Life

At the age of fourteen, Boye played his first competitive bridge at a local club in
Moi, a small town in the south of Norway with a population of 1500. His partner
then was Knut Erik Ljung, not only the best player at the club but also Boye’s
mathematics teacher at school (his multiplication exercises were the highlight of
the week.) Boye believes that the five years he played with his early mentor, from
1987 to 1992, were the most important of his bridge career.
The fondly remembered defensive deal below was played around 1990. Boye
will describe the action.

Both Vul.  10 8 3 Club duplicate

Dealer South  6 3 Moi, Norway
 10 9 8 4 3
 853
 Q 9 4  AJ5
 K 10 5 N  J872
 Q 7 W E  J52
S
 A 10 7 6 4  KQ2
 K762
 AQ94
 AK6
 J9

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Boye Fritz Knut Erik Jonny
Brogeland Saltnes Ljung Pedersen
1NT
all pass

I led the 6 and Ljung took the first two tricks with the Q and K. He
switched to the 8 and declarer won with the ace. Declarer played three
rounds of diamonds, and I pitched a spade as Ljung won with the jack. The
2 return went to the nine and ten, and I cashed three rounds of clubs,
getting to this situation before the last club:

13 Defend with Your Life | 141

  10 8
 —
 10 9
 —
 Q 9  AJ
 K N  J7
 — W E  —
S
 7  —
 K7
 Q4
 —
 —

When I led the 7, Ljung discarded the J. Can you believe it now? Declarer
was caught in a defensive criss-cross squeeze! Whichever spotcard he
decided to throw, we would score the remaining three tricks. When he let
go of a heart, I cashed the K and Ljung got the last two tricks with the
A and the J. The contract was down four. I slept well that night.

Another happy moment from Boye’s formative years at the bridge table was the
defense against this spade game, from his first win in a big pairs event.

Neither Vul.  7 3 2 1993 Akademisk tournament

Dealer South  J 7 Oslo, Norway
 AK
 AQJ742
 K 8 4  Q9
 K Q 8 3 2 N  A65
 9 5 4 W E  QJ863
S
 K 10  653
 A J 10 6 5
 10 9 4
 10 7 2
 98

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Holdaas Kristiansen Hoftaniska
2
pass 2NT pass 3
pass 4 all pass

Boye led the K and Kåre Kristiansen overtook with the A to return another heart,
drawing South’s 10 and Boye’s Q. It was clear to Boye in the West seat that no

142 | Bridge at the Edge

defensive tricks would come from the minors. He continued with a third round of
hearts, declarer winning with the 9.
A diamond to the ace was followed by a finesse of the J, losing to West’s K.
When Boye led a fourth heart, it mattered little that this would give declarer a ruff-
and-sluff. East ruffed with the Q, overruffed by South’s A and this promoted
West’s 8 into the setting trick.
Aided by this board, Boye and Kåre went on to win the event. The victory was
especially sweet since they finished 1% ahead of Geir Helgemo and Tor Helness,
who were already big stars at that time.
Boye recalls:

This still stands as one of my finest memories — in tears, phoning

my grandmother from a phone booth just minutes after winning the
tournament. At the weekends, as an eight-year-old, I loved going to my
grandparents’, as my grandmother made the most delicious pancakes
with tasty bacon. Every night I was allowed to stay up, playing cards, and
one of these nights they taught me to play three-handed bridge. Just to
pick up the cards and count my points was a thrill, let alone to aim for a
certain number of tricks in the bidding and then plan the play of a hand.

In the 1998 Norwegian Club Championship, Boye won the Rica Prize for the best
defended deal of the event. He was sitting West on this deal:

Neither Vul.  — 1998 Norwegian championship

Dealer South  AQ63 Fagernes
 AQJ74
 Q 10 4 2
 9 6 4 2  AQ873
 J 9 4 N  87
 K 9 8 5 W E  10 6
S
 K6  8753
 K J 10 5
 K 10 5 2
 32
 AJ9

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Halvorsen Sælensminde Sjømæling
1
pass 2NT pass 4
pass 4 dbl pass
pass rdbl pass 5
pass 6 all pass

13 Defend with Your Life | 143

North’s Jacoby 2NT showed a game-forcing raise in hearts; South’s jump to 4 then
indicated a minimum. When Erik Sælensminde doubled the 4 cuebid, North’s
redouble showed that his control was first-round rather than second-round. With
trumps 3-2 and the diamond finesse onside, you may think that the slam was
destined to succeed. Let’s see what happened.
Boye led a spade, ruffed in the dummy. Knut Sjømæling led the 2, East
showing count with the 7 (second-best from four), and finessed the J. If Boye
were to win this trick, the slam would easily be made. Suppose he returns another
spade. Declarer ruffs in dummy, cashes the AQ and plays a club to the nine. He
can then draw West’s last trump and finesse the Q. He returns to hand with the
A, finesses the J and discards both the remaining spades (one on the Q, the
other on the A).
Boye knew from Erik’s count signal that declarer had three clubs and was
likely to repeat the club finesse. Hoping to spoil the entry position, he let the J
win! Declarer finessed the Q successfully and played a club to the nine. When
Boye won with the K and led another spade, declarer’s entries were hopelessly
entangled. He ruffed in the dummy, played the ace-queen of trumps and tried to
reach his hand with the A. Boye ruffed with the J and a spade to East’s ace put
the slam two down.
Sometimes a position is reached where ‘only one card is good enough’. It
happened on this deal from a round-robin match in the Bermuda Bowl.

E-W Vul.  10 2003 Bermuda Bowl

Dealer East  A 6 5 Norway - Canada
 AK973
 K854
 K J 7 6 3 2  5
 K J 9 7 N  842
 5 W E  J842
S
 Q3  A 10 9 6 2
 AQ984
 Q 10 3
 Q 10 6
 J7

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland L’Ecuyer Sælensminde Fergani
pass 1
pass 2 pass 2
pass 3 pass 3
pass 3 pass 3NT
all pass

144 | Bridge at the Edge

On this type of auction the best attack is often in dummy’s second-best suit. Boye
led the Q and this was allowed to hold. East won the club continuation with the
ace and cleared the suit, South and West throwing spades. Not blessed with any
psychic powers, declarer played the A and Q, West throwing another spade. A
diamond to the king was followed by the 10 to the queen and king. Boye was on
lead in the West seat with these cards still out:

 —
 A65
 97
 8
 J 7  —
 K J 9 7 N  842
 — W E  J
S
 —  96
 A98
 Q 10 3
 —
 —

Suppose you were sitting West here. How would you continue the defense?
You can see what would happen on a low heart return. Declarer would win
with the 10 and throw West back on lead with ace and another spade. The
enforced heart exit would be run to the queen and declarer would have his contract.
A spade return is better for the defense but declarer still has a chance to make
the contract if he scores his spades and endplays West with a heart honor. Only one
card is guaranteed to defeat the contract and Boye found it: the K! Declarer won
with the A and continued with the Q and 10. Boye scored the J9, putting the
contract one down, and then had to lead into the spade tenace.
Take Boye’s East cards here and see if you can match his defense:

13 Defend with Your Life | 145

 N-S Vul.  K Q 4 2002 Life Master Pairs
Dealer East  10 9 5 Phoenix, Arizona
 Q8765
 A7
 10 7
N  A86
W E  A 10 4
S
 K9652

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Forrester Brogeland
1 1
dbl 2 dbl 2
3 3 all pass

Tony Forrester’s negative double implies hearts and you show your three cards in
hearts with a support double. South arrives in 3 and Forrester leads the K. At
Trick 2 he switches to the 3 and you win with the A.
How would you continue the defense from the East seat? When you have
made up your mind, you can take a look at the full deal:

 KQ4
 10 9 5
 Q8765
 A7
 9 8 6  10 7
 Q J 7 3 2 N  A86
 K W E  A 10 4
S
 J 10 8 4  K9652
 AJ532
 K4
 J932
 Q3

If partner’s K opening lead was from a doubleton, you can play the A and give him
a diamond ruff. That will be four tricks for the defense but it is likely that declarer
can then discard any club losers on the surplus diamond winners in dummy. If he
holds the K, he will make the contract.
Boye paused to calculate West’s diamond holding. Would he really have made
a speculative lead from Kx when he could have led one of the two suits that the
partnership had bid? Surely he must hold a singleton K!
Once this inference had been taken, the next step was to lead the 10 at Trick
3, retaining the A. Forrester ruffed and switched to the J, setting up Boye’s

146 | Bridge at the Edge

K. What’s more, this card had been set up before dummy’s long diamonds were
established for club discards. The defenders duly scored a club and a second
diamond, putting the contract one down. It was a memorable defense.
The next deal illustrates a difference between defending at teams and at pairs.
With the chance to defeat a vulnerable game at IMPs scoring, Boye took a risk that
he might have spurned in a pairs event.

Both Vul.  Q 8 3 2006 Icelandair Open

Dealer North  Q 4 2 Reykjavik
 84
 A K J 10 5
 10 9 5 4 2  A
 K 10 N  876
 Q 10 W E  KJ9652
S
 Q432  976
 KJ76
 AJ953
 A73
 8

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
1 2 2
pass 3 pass 4
all pass

Erik Sælensminde led the Q against the heart game. Declarer won with the A
and then played ace and another trump. Suppose you were sitting West. How
would you continue the defense?
With only two tricks available to the defenders in the red suits, and none in
clubs, Erik could see the need for a spade switch. He switched to the 10 and Boye
won with the bare ace. All now depended on East’s next move. What would your
decision have been?
If West had led from a doubleton diamond, his remaining card could be the 10,
7 or 3. At pairs it would be dangerous to return a low diamond, underleading
the KJ, because if declarer won with the 10 he would score a valuable overtrick.
At teams, any chance to beat the contract should be grabbed. The only way to beat
the contract was to find partner with exactly Q10 and Boye duly returned a low
diamond. He was rewarded by the appearance of partner’s 10 and a spade ruff
then defeated the game.
(At double-dummy, declarer can make the contract — even with an overtrick
— by finessing the J at Trick 2. This would be way against the odds compared
with the line that he actually chose.)

13 Defend with Your Life | 147

 The next deal comes from a Bermuda Bowl final. The Americans reached
3NT on a deal where Helgemo and Helness had stopped in 3 at the other table.
Finding the right defense against 3NT was therefore worth a bundle of IMPs. How
would you have fared?

N-S Vul.  K Q 6 4 2 2001 Bermuda Bowl final

Dealer North  J 8 Norway - USA
 KJ52
 A5
 9 7 5  AJ83
 A Q 6 N  10 4 3 2
 Q 10 4 W E  83
S
 Q 10 7 2  943
 10
 K975
 A976
 KJ86

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Meltzer Sælensminde Larsen
1 pass 1NT
pass 2 pass 2NT
pass 3NT all pass

Boye led the 2, Kyle Larsen winning East’s 9 with the J. A finesse of the J
proved successful and declarer then ran the J to Boye’s queen. Suppose you had
been sitting West. What would you have done next?
You can expect declarer to have seven tricks in the minor suits. If he can add
one spade and one heart to the total, he will reach the tape before you. Continuing
clubs would have been too slow; declarer would win with the ace, run the 8 and
set up a spade trick. Boye realized that three spade tricks would be needed to
accompany his two tricks in hearts. The 9 might have a role to play later, so he
switched to the 5.
Larsen played low from dummy, Erik Sælensminde winning with the J. Back
came the 3 to West’s 9 and dummy’s queen. Running the 8 to West’s A would
not help declarer now, since he would lose five tricks in the majors. He therefore
led the 8 to his K, hoping that East held the A. Not today, my friend. Boye
won with the A and led a third round of spades through dummy’s K. The game
was then two down, which was worth an 8 IMP swing in conjunction with the
+130 from the other table.
The next deal features defense against an elimination end position. Take the
West cards and see how well you would have fared.

148 | Bridge at the Edge

 E-W Vul.  AKQ5 2007 White House Invitational
Dealer East  J85 Amsterdam, Netherlands
 J65
 AK4
 9 6  J3
 A 9 N  K Q 10 2
 K Q 7 4 W E  10 8 3 2
S
 J9852  Q 10 6
 10 8 7 4 2
 7643
 A9
 73

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Paulissen Lanzarotti Schollaardt
pass pass
1 dbl pass 1
pass 2 pass 2
pass 3 pass 4
all pass

Boye led the K, East signaling count with the 3, and declarer followed with the
9. Maarten Schollaardt won the low diamond continuation, crossed to the trump
ace and ruffed dummy’s last diamond. He then drew the outstanding trumps,
cashed the AK and ruffed a club in his hand. Would you have seen the danger
when declarer next led a heart towards dummy’s jack?
Suppose you play the 9 on the first round. You will have to win the next
round of hearts and, with only minor-suit cards in your hand, concede a ruff-
and-sluff. Declarer will discard dummy’s last heart, ruff in his hand and claim the
contract.
When declarer led the 3, Boye rose with the A. The only chance of beating
the contract now was to find partner with the KQ. He exited with his remaining
heart and partner scored two more heart tricks, for one down.

13 Defend with Your Life | 149

 14
Toil and Trouble

Doubled contracts have a character all of their own. It’s as if a thundercloud has
descended and is hovering a few feet above the table. In this chapter we will see
several instructive contracts with one aspect in common — they were all doubled.
By the time the chapter closes, we may have picked up a lesson or two on when a
penalty double is appropriate.
The first deal comes from the final round of a national championship for club
teams.
Both Vul.  63 2002 Norwegian Championship
Dealer West  K6 Sundvolden
 KQJ2
 98762
 K J 9 8 2  Q7
 9 4 N  872
 10 W E  A9875
S
 K J 10 4 3  AQ5
 A 10 5 4
 A Q J 10 5 3
 643
 —

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
pass pass 1 1
1 pass 1NT 2
2 3 pass 4 (!)
dbl all pass

You may choose your own adjective for Boye’s 4 bid. It was a somewhat ambitious
shot, it is true, and he was lucky that dummy had nothing wasted in clubs.
West led the 10, won by East’s A. A trump return would have worked
well, leaving declarer with three spade losers in addition to the trick already lost in

14 Toil and Trouble | 151

diamonds. No, East returned a diamond and West ruffed with the 4. A club came
back to the ace and Boye ruffed in the South hand.
So far the play was the same as at the other table, where the contract was also
4, although not doubled. The other declarer continued with the ace and king of
trumps. He discarded a spade on the fourth round of diamonds and eventually lost
two spade tricks to go one down. Boye drew just one round of trumps, with the
ace, hoping that this would exhaust West’s trumps. He then played dummy’s QJ,
discarding a spade. West was unable to ruff and the contract would now be made
if declarer could ruff a spade in dummy.
When Boye led a low spade from the table, the 7 appeared from East. He
finessed the 10 — losing the first round to West, who did not have a trump to
return. Nothing could then prevent him from ruffing a spade for his tenth trick. (It
would not assist East to insert the Q. Boye would win with the A and play the
10, forcing West to win the trick.)
Switching tack somewhat, we will see a deal where Norway played in a doubled
game at both tables:

Neither Vul.  K 6 3 2003 Bermuda Bowl SF

Dealer East  6 2 Norway - Italy
 J 10 4 2
 KQ82
 Q J 10 5 2  974
 K J 9 8 7 N  Q54
 8 5 3 W E  AKQ6
S
 —  763
 A8
 A 10 3
 97
 A J 10 9 5 4

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Lauria Brogeland Versace Sælensminde
pass 1NT
2 dbl rdbl 3NT
pass pass dbl all pass

Erik Sælensminde opened a strong 1NT, adding a point or two for his chunky club
suit. It was not attractive to defend with such a long suit in his hand, so he jumped
to 3NT on the second round. Alfredo Versace doubled but on any lead there were
nine top tricks. +550 to Norway.
At the other table East opened the bidding:

152 | Bridge at the Edge

 WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH
Helness Nunes Helgemo Fantoni
1 2
dbl 2NT pass 3NT
4 pass 4 dbl
pass pass rdbl pass
4 pass pass dbl
all pass

Nunes and Fantoni did well to reach 3NT but Helness was not willing to surrender.
He bid 4 over Fantoni’s 3NT, looking for the best available trump suit. Helgemo
did not want to guess which major to bid, so he marked time with 4, happy to
play there undoubled if there was no further bidding. When this was doubled, he
redoubled for rescue. Helness ended in 4 doubled and North led the K. What
outcome would you expect?
Helness ruffed the club lead and crossed to the A to lead a trump. When
the K won he led the Q from his hand. South won with the A and led a club,
forcing declarer to ruff again. A second spade went to North’s K and he had to
find a return from 6 6 J104 Q8. Six of his seven cards would have been good
enough to defeat the contract but Nunes chose the seventh, the 6. The contract
was made and Norway gained 15 IMPs — not enough to win the match, as it
turned out.
We will take a breather from doubled contracts at both tables. On this deal
Boye and his partner were doubled in two different games:

N-S Vul.  8 5 4 2004 Euro Championship

Dealer North  AKJ8643 Norway - France
 —
 A62
 A 9 7 6  KQJ3
 9 2 N  Q 10 5
 9 5 4 2 W E  AKJ86
S
 983  10
 10 2
 7
 Q 10 7 3
 KQJ754

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sebbane Sælensminde Rombaut Brogeland
1 dbl 2
pass 4 dbl pass
4 5 pass pass
dbl all pass

14 Toil and Trouble | 153

At the other table, North’s leap to 4 ended the auction. Multon, the French
declarer, ruffed the A lead and crossed to the K. A finesse of the J failed and
the defenders claimed three spade tricks for one down. So, how would Boye fare
in his contract of 5 doubled?
Lionel Sebbane launched the defense with ace and another spade. Jérome
Rombaut won the second spade and switched to the A, aiming to force the trumps
in the hand that contained the long hearts. This line of defense made it likely that
East held a stopper in the heart suit. After ruffing the diamond switch in dummy,
Boye returned to his hand with a spade ruff and led another diamond. This was the
key trick. Which card would you have played from dummy?
Although there was no risk of an overruff, Boye ruffed the second round of
diamonds with dummy’s A to avoid a blockage in the trump suit. He was then
able to lead the 6 to his K and run the remaining trumps. On the last trump
East had to find a discard from Q105 and K. A heart discard would obviously
be fatal, so he threw the K in the hope that West held the Q. It was not to be.
Boye faced the Q and then scored the AK to make his doubled contract. A fine
piece of cardplay!
Boye faced a similar problem on the next deal — communication between the
two hands — but his solution was different. Would you have made the contract?

N-S Vul.  K 10 1996 regional tournament

Dealer East  K J 8 7 4 Bergen, Norway
 J963
 Q5
 J 4 2  9
 10 5 3 N  AQ62
 8 7 2 W E  A K Q 10 4
S
 10 9 6 4  A82
 AQ87653
 9
 5
 KJ73

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Saur Brogeland
1 4
pass pass dbl all pass

East’s double was not music to West’s ears. Since he could hardly bid at the five-
level on his drab hand, he had to pass. He led the 2 and cannot have found much
cheer from the dummy that went down. East won with the 10 and continued
with the A. Boye ruffed in the South hand, noting that he would have to restrict
his losers to the three missing aces. When he led a club to the queen, East won

154 | Bridge at the Edge

with the ace and played another top diamond. Boye ruffed low and saw that if he
ruffed his club loser with the 10, he might have difficulty in returning to his hand
without suffering a trump promotion. How would you have continued from this
point?
Boye cashed the K and ruffed his club loser with the 10. Without cashing
the K, he then led the J. When this was covered by East’s Q, he discarded his
heart loser. After this clever move all thoughts of a defensive trump promotion
could be dismissed. If East played the A next, Boye would ruff, cross to the K
and return to his hand with a heart ruff to draw West’s trumps. East in fact played
a fifth round of diamonds, which Boye ruffed in his hand. If West chose to overruff
with the J, dummy’s K would win the trick and declarer could then return to
hand with a heart ruff to draw trumps. That was ten tricks for declarer, however
the defenders twisted and turned.
Espen Lindqvist was declarer on the next deal, again a doubled game. The
kibitzers at the time would have offered long odds against the contract being made.
When a contract is doubled, however, strange things can happen.

Neither Vul.  A 9 2 2008 Euro Championship

Dealer East  Q 10 4 Norway - Germany
 432
 A652
 K Q 8 4 3  J 10 6
 7 6 N  AKJ8532
 A W E  7
S
 Q 10 8 7 4  J3
 75
 9
 K Q J 10 9 8 6 5
 K9

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Elinescu Brogeland Wladow Lindqvist
4 5
dbl all pass

West led a heart to East’s J and East continued with the K. Lindqvist ruffed with
the 8, West following suit, and led the K to West’s A. How would you attempt
to give yourself a chance when West returns the 7?
East holds eight red cards and must therefore guard at least one black suit, if
not both. There cannot therefore be a genuine black-suit squeeze on West. The
Q threat card is positioned under East’s guard in the suit and cannot be of any use
with regard to a possible double squeeze. In short, Lindqvist realized that he would

14 Toil and Trouble | 155

not be able to make the contract against perfect defense. Instead he aimed to make
life difficult for the defender in the West seat.
Lindqvist won with dummy’s A, deliberately blocking the club suit. If he had
won with the K, there would have been no chance of West abandoning his club
guard later in the play. This way, there might be some doubt in West’s mind as to
the location of the K.
Now came a torrent of diamonds. West decided to keep the KQ, in case
declarer held the J. In fact his first four discards were club, spade, club and club.
He threw two more spades subsequently, keeping KQ and Q as his last three
cards. Lindqvist was then able to play the K and cross to the A to score the 6
as his eleventh trick.
Before moving on, do you think that the defenders should have done better
somehow? After West’s club switch at Trick 4, it was difficult indeed for him to
judge which cards to keep. South was likely to hold two spades and two clubs,
yes, but West still needed to guess whether South held the K or the J. It seems
to us that West should have switched to the K instead of a club. Declarer would
then make the contract only if he held both Jx and Kx, in which case no defense
would have troubled him.
We have something different for you now: Boye is the declarer, in a high-level
doubled contract, and you have the chance to defend against him.

E-W Vul.  J 8 6 3 2010 Vanderbilt round-of-8

Dealer South  A 9 8 6 4 Lynch - Strul
 —
 Q832
 A542
N  Q2
W E  K98
S
 A974

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Gromov Sælensminde Dubinin Brogeland
1
3 dbl 3NT 4
pass pass 5 pass
pass 5 dbl all pass

After an exciting auction, South ends in 5 doubled. West, your partner, leads the
A and declarer ruffs with dummy’s 3. What is your plan for the defense when
declarer’s next move is to call for dummy’s 8?
When you have decided what to do, look at the complete diagram:

156 | Bridge at the Edge

  J863
 A9864
 —
 Q832
 9  A542
 J 10 5 3 N  Q2
 A Q J 7 6 3 2 W E  K98
S
 5  A974
 K Q 10 7
 K7
 10 5 4
 K J 10 6

Alex Dubinin played low, perhaps thinking that declarer would run the 8 to some
bare honor in the West hand. The contract could no longer be beaten! Boye won
with the K and ruffed a diamond in dummy. A heart to the king allowed him to
ruff his last diamond, exhausting the table’s trumps.
Boye reached his hand with the K and led the Q to East’s A. With no
diamonds left, East switched to the Q. Declarer won with the A and led a
second round of clubs. The poor East player had only black cards in his hand. He
could not prevent declarer from reaching his hand in clubs and drawing the last
two trumps with his 107. That was eleven tricks and +650 to go with the +600
for 5 at the other table — a swing of 15 IMPs.
To beat the contract, East had to win with the trump ace and play another
trump. Declarer would no longer be able to ruff all his diamond losers.

14 Toil and Trouble | 157

 All four tables in the Vanderbilt semi-finals reached 4 doubled here:

Both Vul.  10 9 2 2006 Vanderbilt SF

Dealer West  K Dallas, Texas
 10 5 3
 A J 10 9 7 2
 K Q 8  A7643
 Q 9 8 N  3
 K Q J 9 8 W E  A742
S
 Q5  864
 J5
 A J 10 7 6 5 4 2
 6
 K3

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Welland Shugart Fallenius Brogeland
1NT pass 2 pass
2 pass pass 4
pass pass dbl all pass

Boye passed on the first round of bidding, to discover how strong the opponents’
hands were. When they dropped the bidding in 2 it was clear that North, Rita
Shugart, would hold at least 8 points. (Boye had 9 points and East-West would
surely have tried for game if they held 24 points or more.) Hoping that his partner’s
points would plug a few of the gaps in his hand, Boye bid 4. East doubled this,
on the strength of his two aces facing a strong 1NT. As you see, East-West in fact
had a spade game available their way, due to the double fit.
Both Wests in this match led the K against 4 doubled. At Boye’s table East
signaled encouragement with the 7 and West played another diamond. Curtains
for the defense! Boye ruffed in his hand, crossed to the K and returned to his
hand with another diamond ruff. He drew a second round of trumps with the
ace, East showing out, and played the K and A, West’s queen appearing. Away
went a spade on the third round of clubs and West had to ruff with his trump trick.
Declarer lost one spade, one heart and one diamond, making the contract.
At the other table Ishmael Del’Monte sat West with George Mittelman East.
They were playing the excellent signaling method known as ‘ace for attitude, king
for count’. In other words, they would signal their attitude if partner led an ace
(or a queen) but show their count after a king lead. When Del’Monte led the
K, Mittelman gave a reverse count signal of the 2, showing an even number of
diamonds. Since declarer was known to hold a huge number of hearts, the odds
were high that East held four diamonds to declarer’s one. Del’Monte therefore
switched to the K. This time East signaled an odd number of spades, with a

158 | Bridge at the Edge

reverse count signal of the 7. Knowing that a second spade would stand up, West
cashed the Q successfully. The reversion to diamonds was ruffed but nothing
could stop West from scoring the setting trick with his Q.
In the other semi-final one West continued diamonds at Trick 2 and the other
switched to a trump. A flat board in minus 790! It is hard to imagine a more
compelling advertisement in favor of ‘ace for attitude, king for count’.
Have you heard of the Buffett Cup? It is the bridge equivalent of golf’s Ryder
Cup, where Europe faces the USA every two years. To match the three sections of
the Ryder Cup, the bridge event is split into teams-of-four, pairs and an individual
(all with point-a-board scoring). The next deal arose in the individual segment of
the 2008 event. Take the West cards and see if you can solve the defensive problem
that Boye faced.

E-W Vul.  Q 9 8 7 6 2008 Buffett Cup

Dealer South  8 7 4 2 Louisville, Kentucky
 73
 J3
 J54
 KJ N
 KJ96 W E
S
 A 10 8 7

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Garner Auken Hamman
1
dbl 2 2 3
pass pass dbl all pass

Boye led the 4, Sabine Auken winning with the 10. When the 5 was returned,
Hamman put in the 10 and Boye won with the J. This is the first part of the
problem. What would you return from the West hand?
It is not safe to play another spade, since there is a danger that declarer will
set up dummy’s spade suit. Boye decided to return the K and all followed to this
trick, South winning with the ace. Hamman’s next move was to lead the Q from
his hand. Boye won with the K, East showing an odd number of diamonds, and
now faced a serious problem. What should he do next?
When you have made your decision, take a look at the full diagram:

14 Toil and Trouble | 159

  Q9876
 8742
 73
 J3
 J 5 4  A K 10 2
 K J N  95
 K J 9 6 W E  842
S
 A 10 8 7  Q652
 3
 A Q 10 6 3
 A Q 10 5
 K94

The early play was: spade lead to East’s ten and a trump return to the ten and jack.
Boye returned the king of trumps to the ace and declarer then threw him on lead
with the Q to his K. Suppose West exits with a diamond. Declarer will win with
the 10 and throw a club from dummy on the A. He will then ditch dummy’s
last club on the fourth round of diamonds, a loser-on-loser play. West will be
endplayed without escape. A spade will allow dummy’s suit to be set up. A club,
high or low, will let declarer score his K and ruff the other two club losers.
Boye found the only exit to prevent the contract from being made. On lead
with the K, he played ace and another club. This allowed declarer to make his K
but he was left with three losers (two diamonds and a club) and only two trumps
in dummy with which to ruff them. One down!
We will close the chapter with a deal where Boye made two bold moves during
the bidding:

N-S Vul.  Q 8 4 3 1996 Nordic Championship

Dealer South  K Q 7 3 Faaborg, Denmark
 93
 J32
 K 2  J 10 6
 J 2 N  A 10 9 6 5 4
 A 7 6 5 4 2 W E  —
S
 K75  Q 10 9 4
 A975
 8
 K Q J 10 8
 A86

160 | Bridge at the Edge

 WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH
Sælensminde Brogeland
1
pass 1 pass 1
pass 2 3 3
pass 4 dbl all pass

As you look at Boye’s bid of 3, you are maybe regretting the purchase of a book by
two authors, at least one of whom is completely mad. Hang on a minute and listen
to the reasoning behind the bid. West has neither overcalled in a major nor made a
takeout double, despite being white against red and obviously holding fair values.
It follows that he should hold some length in clubs. You’re not convinced? Well,
it was many years ago; Boye might not find such an overcall nowadays.
The main point of the deal lies in Boye’s double of 4. This could hardly be
based on high-card values and was therefore lead-directing. Erik Sælensminde
led the A, Boye throwing a heart, and continued with a suit-preference 2. Boye
ruffed and returned a club, the defenders eventually claiming two trump tricks, two
clubs and the two red aces for a penalty of 800. The time to try such a double is
when the opponents’ auction is limited and you have some reason to think that the
indicated lead will defeat the contract. When their bidding is less limited, you may
run into a redouble and a smirking opponent eventually saying ‘Now, what does
that come to?’ Not a pleasant experience!

14 Toil and Trouble | 161

 15
Battles Around the
Trump Suit

In this chapter we will see some deals where declarer had to operate with an
inadequate trump suit. In particular, we will look at how the ruff-and-sluff can be
a valuable weapon for the defenders when seeking to wrest trump control.
The USA’s Rose Meltzer reached game on a 4-3 spade fit on this deal:

Both Vul.  Q 8 4 2001 Bermuda Bowl final

Dealer West  Q 7 Norway - USA
 AK54
 10 8 5 2
 A 9 7  632
 A K J 9 6 2 N  10 5 3
 J 9 7 2 W E  Q 10 6 3
S
 —  K73
 K J 10 5
 84
 8
 AQJ964

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Larsen Brogeland Meltzer
1 pass 1NT 2
3 4 pass 4
all pass

Helgemo/Helness had pocketed +130 in 4 at the other table, so the success or

failure of Meltzer’s spade game would swing a large number of IMPs. Take the West
cards. You cash the AK, your partner playing the 3 and the 5 to show three
cards in the suit. What next?

15 Battles Around the Trump Suit | 163

 Only one defense is good enough. You must play a third round of hearts, even
though this will give a ruff-and-sluff. Erik Sælensminde continued with the J
and Meltzer ruffed with dummy’s Q, throwing a club from her hand. When she
played a trump to the ten, Sælensminde won with the ace and led a fourth round of
hearts! If declarer discards from dummy, East will uppercut with the 6; this will
force South’s J and promote West’s 9 into the setting trick. Meltzer chose instead
to ruff with dummy’s 8. Since this was dummy’s last trump, she then had to take
a club finesse while there were still two trumps out. West ruffed the first round of
clubs and the game was one down.
Let’s return to the third trick and imagine that declarer ruffs with the 8 instead
of the Q. She can then play the Q to West’s A. A fourth round of hearts will
not work now, since East’s potential uppercut will no longer be effective. West can
still beat the contract, however, by switching to a diamond. This removes dummy’s
last entry and again forces declarer to take a premature club finesse, West ruffing
as before.
You may think there was nothing special about the play of the next hand but
few declarers managed to make the contract.

Neither Vul.  J 10 2008 Life Master Pairs

Dealer South  10 4 2 Boston, Mass.
 K 10 8 4
 K986
 9 2  Q8653
 K Q 9 5 N  8
 A Q 7 W E  632
S
 J542  Q 10 7 3
 AK74
 AJ763
 J95
 A

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Lindqvist Brogeland
1
pass 2 pass 2
pass 3 pass 4
all pass

North’s 2 response showed 8-11 points and three-card heart support. How would
you play the heart game when West leads the 2 to your bare A?
Boye played the two top spades and led a third round of the suit. West could
not benefit by ruffing and discarded the 7. After ruffing the spade in dummy,
Boye played the K and discarded a diamond. A club ruff in the South hand was

164 | Bridge at the Edge

followed by declarer’s last spade. Again, West had no reason to ruff. He discarded
a club and the spade was ruffed with dummy’s 4.
When the 10 was run, West won with the Q and played the A and Q,
won with dummy’s king. Declarer’s remaining three cards were the AJ7. He
ruffed a diamond with the 7, overruffed with the 9 and West then had to lead
from his K5 into South’s AJ tenace. Making ten tricks in 4 was worth a full
90% of the available matchpoints!
We will present the next deal differently. Watch as the play is described and
see if you can spot how the defenders could have beaten the contract.

Both Vul.  8 7 6 5 2010 Euro Championship

Dealer North  J 10 7 Norway - Iceland
 AK2
 864
 K  AJ32
 K Q 4 3 2 N  865
 J 9 8 7 4 W E  10 6 3
S
 Q2  973
 Q 10 9 4
 A9
 Q5
 A K J 10 5

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Baldursson Svendsen Jonsson Brogeland
pass pass 1
1 dbl pass 3
pass 4 all pass

Boye won the K lead and played three top diamonds to discard the 9. After a
trump to the ten and king, West forced the South hand by playing the Q. With
no quick entry to the dummy, Boye cashed the AK. When the Q fell from West,
he played the J. West could not ruff and the contract was made.
Did you spot the defenders’ missed chance? Instead of playing the Q, West
needed to play a fourth diamond, weakening dummy’s trumps. Suppose declarer
ruffs with dummy’s 6. East discards a club, leaving this position:

15 Battles Around the Trump Suit | 165

  87
 J 10
 —
 864
 —  AJ3
 Q 4 3 2 N  86
 9 W E  —
S
 Q2  97
 Q94
 —
 —
 A K J 10

When the 7 is led, East rises with the A and plays a heart. If declarer ducks this
to West, he will have no entry to dummy to finesse the 9. Suppose instead that
he ruffs with the 9. Whether he plays the Q next or runs the clubs, he will lose
trump control and go one down.
Let’s see one more deal that illustrates the defensive power of the ruff-and-sluff.
The play was interesting from both sides of the table.

N-S Vul.  Q65 2007 Bermuda Bowl

Dealer East  Q43 Norway - USA 1
 A Q 10 4
 742
 K 9  J 10 4 2
 K 10 N  652
 K 8 7 3 2 W E  J96
S
 K 10 6 5  J93
 A873
 AJ987
 5
 AQ8

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Helness Rosenberg Helgemo Zia
pass 1
pass 1NT pass 2
pass 2 pass 2
pass 3 pass 4
all pass

Rosenberg followed an artificial sequence to show a balanced limit raise in hearts.

Boye, South at the other table, also reached the heart game. Both Wests led a low

166 | Bridge at the Edge

diamond and the early play was the same at both tables: Q finessed, A for a club
discard, club finesse losing to West’s K.
Let’s see how the defense developed at Zia’s table. Helness played a third round
of diamonds and Zia ruffed. He led a spade towards dummy and Helness rose with
the K, forcing declarer again with the K. Zia crossed to the Q and ran the Q,
losing to West’s K. These cards remained:

 6
 43
 —
 74
 —  J 10
 10 N  65
 8 W E  —
S
 10 6 5  J
 A8
 AJ
 —
 A

How would you continue the defense from the West seat?
Suppose you play a club. Declarer will win with the ace and draw one more
round of trumps with the ace. He will then give himself a double chance of success
by playing the A. He will make the contract when spades are 3-3 or when they
break 4-2 but the defender with the doubleton spade does not hold the last trump.
(This is how Boye made the contract at the other table, after West had followed
a different defense.) To avoid this outcome, Tor Helness led a fifth round of
diamonds! This conceded a ruff-and-sluff, yes, but see the effect of it. Zia ruffed in
dummy with the 3, overruffed by the 5 and J. Declarer could no longer make
the contract against a 4-2 spade break. He had to draw the outstanding trumps and
rely on spades being 3-3. That was one down.
On the next deal Erik Sælensminde played the macho man by opening a one-
bid on an aceless 9-count. He ended in 4 on a deal where declarer at the other
table went down in 2. Hardly a promising situation, you might think…

15 Battles Around the Trump Suit | 167

 N-S Vul.  J 9 2002 Euro Championship
Dealer South  A J 9 7 4 Norway - Poland
 954
 A98
 Q 5 2  A 10 6
 K 3 N  10 8 6 2
 A J 10 8 3 2 W E  KQ7
S
 10 2  Q63
 K8743
 Q5
 6
 KJ754

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Balicki Brogeland Zmudzinski Sælensminde
1
2 dbl 2NT 3
pass 3 dbl 4
pass 4 all pass

It was not a contract that the VuGraph commentators had suggested when the deal
first flashed onto the screen. The lie of the cards was benign, however. Declarer
would certainly lose two trump tricks and a diamond. To beat the contract, the
defenders would have to force the South hand continually in the diamond suit.
Cezary Balicki found the necessary opening attack — the A followed by
another diamond. Erik ruffed in his hand and led the 5 to dummy’s J. He then
called for dummy’s J. Adam Zmudzinski needed to rise with the A and force
declarer with his last diamond. Since West had a trump entry and more diamonds
to play, declarer would then have lost trump control. The J actually ran to West’s
Q. West could force the South hand with a diamond but Sælensminde then
crossed to the A and led a trump towards the king. When East took his A he had
no diamonds left. Declarer was able to draw the last trumps and take an eventual
club finesse for the contract.
At the other table the Polish South opened 2 (showing a two-suiter) and
this was passed out. When Tor Helness chose the seemingly uninspired lead of
the K, Lloyd’s of London would have insured the contract. According to the
championship bulletin, declarer decided to score as many trump tricks as possible,
making use of dummy’s J9. He was subsequently ‘affected by the heat of the
room’, the account continues, and failed to cash the Q, ending with only seven
tricks. A weird board indeed.
The Italian maestros, Benito Garozzo and Giorgio Belladonna, occasionally
surprised the kibitzers by drawing trumps only at the very end of the play.
Sometimes the aim was to discover the likely lie of the trump suit; sometimes they

168 | Bridge at the Edge

hoped to force the defenders to surrender a trump trick at the end. We will finish
the chapter with a deal where Boye played the same way.

Neither Vul.  A 9 2 1998 Nordic Championship

Dealer East  7 3 Norway - Denmark
 AKJ4
 Q 10 7 5
 Q 10 8 5  4
 8 4 N  Q J 10 9 6 2
 Q 10 3 W E  965
S
 KJ84  A96
 KJ763
 AK5
 872
 32

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
2 2
pass 3 pass 3
pass 4 all pass

West led the 8, Boye winning with the A and leading a club. West rose with
the K and played another heart to South’s king. A club to the ten and East’s ace
was followed by a third round of hearts, West discarding a diamond and dummy
ruffing. All followed to the AK and Boye drew one round of trumps with the ace.
Dummy’s Q then allowed him to pitch his last diamond.
These cards remained in play:

 9
 —
 J4
 5
 Q 10 8  —
 — N  J 10 6
 — W E  9
S
 J  —
 KJ76
 —
 —
 —

15 Battles Around the Trump Suit | 169

Unless his Q had been an imaginative falsecard, West’s initial shape was marked
as 4-2-3-4. Boye ruffed a club to reduce his trumps to the same length as West’s
and then led the 7 from his hand. West won with the 10 and had to lead into
the KJ tenace. Game made!

170 | Bridge at the Edge

 16
Enter the Illusionist

No bridge player can say that his game is complete until he has mastered the art of
deception. Some players would actually prefer to bring home a dubious contract
by this route than by a clean-cut technical play. Does this mean that there is a hint
of the masochist in them? It’s not for us to say.
On the first deal Boye cast a magical cloak over his threatening club holding.
From the West defender’s point of view, declarer’s KQ became invisible.

Neither Vul.  6 5 4 2006 National Open Teams

Dealer South  Q J 10 9 3 Canberra, Australia
 AQ75
 7
 A J 2  KQ97
 5 N  8
 9 6 3 W E  K J 10 8 2
S
 A J 10 9 4 3  862
 10 8 3
 AK7642
 4
 KQ5

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Erichsen Brogeland
1
2 3 3 4
all pass

North’s 3 showed a sound raise in hearts and East’s 3 was intended as lead-
directing. West duly led the 6 and Boye won with dummy’s ace, sure from East’s
diamond bid that he would hold the king. There are four top losers. How would
you try to give yourself a chance?
Suppose you play a club to one of your honors at Trick 2. West will surely see
the risk that you hold the other missing club honor and are about to discard one

16 Enter the Illusionist | 171

of dummy’s spade losers on it. He will switch to the 2 and the contract will die
an early death.
Boye tried something different. He led the 7 from dummy and contributed
the 5 from his hand! Not sensing any danger, West won with the 9 and
continued with a second round of diamonds. Boye ruffed in his hand, drew trumps
and led the K for a ruffing finesse against West. He was then able to discard one
of dummy’s spades on the established Q.
Note that it would be a poor idea to draw trumps before playing a club. If
trumps broke 2-0, one of the defenders might signal a strong spade holding.
On another deal from the same event Boye recognized the opportunity for a
deceptive opening lead.

E-W Vul.  A 9 7 4 2006 National Open Teams

Dealer West  A K 10 7 Canberra, Australia
 9
 K 10 4 2
 6 5  KJ
 8 5 3 N  J942
 K J 8 6 W E  A Q 10 7 4
S
 AQJ9  75
 Q 10 8 3 2
 Q6
 532
 863

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Brightling Erichsen Thompson
pass 1 1 1
2 3 pass 3
all pass

West’s 2 showed a good diamond raise and North’s 3 showed a good spade raise.
After this pleasing symmetry in the auction, Boye had to find a lead against South’s
3. Any ideas?
North had opened 1 and shown most of the points held by the partnership.
It was therefore a near certainty that he would hold the K. Boye chose the Q as
his opening shot and, sure enough, dummy went down with the K.
Placing the A with East, Ian Thompson played low from dummy on the
first trick. At double-dummy the contract can now be beaten by force: A, club
ruffed with the J, diamond underlead to West’s king and a fourth club to promote
the bare K. The club position was not clear, however, and Boye switched to a
heart. Thompson won in the dummy and called for the 9, East rising with the
A. Declarer won the heart return with the Q and paused to assess the position.

172 | Bridge at the Edge

West might well have led a diamond from a combination headed by the KQ, so he
seemed to hold at most KJ in the suit. Add in the QJ and that still left him short
of his 2 bid, which had shown a sound raise. He must hold the K too!
Very sound reasoning, no doubt, but when declarer ran the Q it lost to the
K. The defenders then scored the A and a club ruff. A contract of 3 had gone
down when the cards lay well enough for 4 to be made.
Next we will look at a single-suit position from the 1996 Nordic Championships
in Denmark. (The full deal was not recorded for posterity). Sweden’s Sven Åke
Bjerregaard led a third-and-fifth 8 against 3NT and this was the lie of the suit:

 K742
 Q 10 8 3  5
 AJ96

Boye won deceptively with the J and then led the 6. Placing his partner with
the 9, West followed with the 3. Boye called for dummy’s 4 and then had four
club tricks. One to show the grandchildren!
Boye tried a rather unusual deception on the next deal. He will describe events
as he saw them at the time.

E-W Vul.  AJ53 1998 Norwegian Junior final

Dealer East  A743 Fagernes
 10 7 3
 82
 K Q 8 7 6 4  10 2
 Q J 2 N  K986
 Q 9 W E  AK8654
S
 10 7  6
 9
 10 5
 J2
 AKQJ9543

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Saur Brogeland
1 5
dbl all pass

West leads the K and it sure looks like ten tricks. There are no squeeze
opportunities and no chance of ruffing out the Q in the West hand.
Should I concede one down?

16 Enter the Illusionist | 173

 It can’t do much harm to duck the opening lead. West will probably
switch to a diamond and collect two more tricks for one down; my heart
loser will then go away on the A.
I try a low spade from dummy and look what happened. East followed
with the 10 and I had to play my 9. West was sure that I must have a
second spade, after not winning the A. He tried to give his partner a ruff
and I finessed the J successfully for my eleventh trick!
West should have been able to figure this out, I agree. Not by knowing
who had the singleton spade, but by checking it by playing the Q at Trick
2. East is more or less marked with AK for his opening bid. He will
discourage in diamonds if he has a singleton spade and wants a spade
ruff. On his actual hand he will encourage a diamond continuation and the
defenders will take the three tricks that belong to them.

Deceptive plays are not restricted to the play of the hand. Let’s see a deceptive
move from Boye during the auction.

Both Vul.  7 5 4 2008 Euro Championship

Dealer South  A 9 6 Norway - Netherlands
 98
 AK953
 K 6 2  10 9 8 3
 J 7 3 N  K Q 10 8
 A Q 10 7 6 5 W E  432
S
 J  82
 AQJ
 542
 KJ
 Q 10 7 6 4

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Drijver Lindqvist Brink Brogeland
1
1 2 dbl 2(!)
pass 3 pass 3NT
all pass

Espen Lindqvist’s 2 showed a sound raise to at least 3. East’s double meant that
he did not want a diamond lead from partner, thereby implying that he had another
suit that he would like to be led. What should Boye bid now in the South seat?
With a near minimum and the long suit headed only by the queen, some
players would sign off in 3. If your intention is to play in 3NT when partner
holds a heart stopper, you could show your good spades with a rebid of 2. Partner

174 | Bridge at the Edge

might then indicate a heart stopper with a bid of 3 and you could say 3NT. Boye
thought that he might make nine tricks in 3NT, provided he could avoid a heart
lead. He therefore made the deceptive bid of 2, indicating that he held a stopper
in hearts but was weak in spades!
Lindqvist had no spade stopper and limited his hand by rebidding 3. Boye
continued to the intended 3NT contract and West had to find a lead. A heart
would have been deadly, since East would have gained the lead in the suit to play a
diamond through declarer’s KJ. With declarer’s 2 bid fresh in his mind, West led
the 2 to the 8 and Q. So far so good, from Boye’s point of view, but there were
still only eight tricks on view. How would you have continued the play?
Boye ran the club suit, hoping that he could eventually endplay West for the
extra trick that he needed. West’s first three discards were two diamonds and one
heart. These cards were still to be played:

 75
 A96
 98
 9
 K 6  10 9
 J 7 N  K Q 10 8
 A Q 10 7 W E  43
S
 —  —
 AJ
 542
 KJ
 6

When the last club was played, West could beat the contract if he ditched another
diamond. This was hard to judge and he chose instead to throw his penultimate
heart. Boye was quick to take advantage of this slip. He cashed dummy’s A,
removing West’s safe exit card in that suit, and continued with a spade to his ace.
Seeing that he would be endplayed with a spade if he followed with the 6 on this
trick, West unblocked K under South’s A. This would have saved him if East had
held the J. As it was, Boye faced the J and claimed his game.
A bidding deception of a different type paid off handsomely on the next deal,
from the final of the 2005 European mixed teams in Tenerife. Both sides were
vulnerable and the bidding started like this:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

L.Goldberg B.Brogeland U.Goldberg T.Brogeland
1 pass 3 3
pass ?

16 Enter the Illusionist | 175

East’s 3 was a Bergen raise, based on four-card spade support, and Boye held these
cards in the North seat:

 A 10 2  K 10 8 4  A 7 2  8 3 2

What would you say now on those cards?

When you have made up your mind, you can read Boye’s own thoughts on
the situation:

Of course I was worth a raise to 4. The trouble with such a bid was that
East or West would surely bid 4 over it. The decision whether to continue
to 5 would not then be so obvious. I decided to hide the value of my hand
by passing Tonje’s 3. I was confident that this would not be passed out
because lefty’s 3 bid had already indicated the values to play in 3.

This was the full deal:

Both Vul.  A 10 2 2005 Euro Open mixed final

Dealer West  K 10 8 4 Erichsen - Goldberg
 A72
 832
 K Q 7 5 4  J986
 A J 7 N  —
 9 8 5 W E  Q43
S
 Q7  J 10 9 6 5 4
 3
 Q9653 2
 K J 10 6
 AK

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

L.Goldberg B.Brogeland U.Goldberg T.Brogeland
1 pass 3 3
pass pass (!) 3 pass
pass 4 pass pass
dbl all pass

Boye passed Tonje’s 3 overcall, confident that Ulla-Britt Goldberg would compete
with 3. This vision in his crystal ball duly materialized and after two passes he
bid 4. It was an unexpected bonus when this was doubled by Lars Goldberg in
the pass-out seat. Tonje guessed the hearts correctly but not the diamonds, ending
with a doubled overtrick and a score of +990. At the other table the bidding was
a brief 1 - 2, with South not venturing an overcall. Espen Erichsen was allowed

176 | Bridge at the Edge

to make the spade partial and the Norwegian team gained 15 IMPs on their way to
collecting the gold medals.
In 1995 Boye won the first World Junior Pairs in Belgium’s Ghent, partnering
Geir Helgemo. When asked about this triumph in an interview at the time, he
replied ‘Well, to tell you the truth, I played terribly and Geir carried me to more
than a 61% score. It was weird to become a world champion after playing maybe
the worst tournament in my life!’
Let’s sample the Helgemo magic from that memorable win:

Both Vul.  Q 3 1995 World Junior Pairs

Dealer South  7 3 Ghent, Belgium
 J8652
 6432
 J 9 8 6 5 4  10
 K Q 10 5 N  J9864
 Q 10 W E  A3
S
 9  KQJ85
 AK72
 A2
 K974
 A 10 7

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Helgemo Brogeland
1
pass 1 (!) 2 2
pass 3 all pass

Helgemo’s psychic response was a bold move, particularly when vulnerable. He

struck lucky when Boye held length in spades and not hearts. Boye did not like the
look of 3NT over partner’s sign-off in 3 because East’s clubs were likely to be set
up on the opening lead and he might then require nine quick winners.
Boye won the club lead with the ace, crossed to dummy with the Q and led a
trump. East defended strongly by rising with the A, cashing two club tricks and
playing a fourth round of clubs. If Boye were to ruff this with the 9, West would
overruff and beat the contract by giving East a spade ruff. Boye side-stepped this
fate by ruffing with the K and playing a trump.
Scoring +110 on the North-South cards yielded a sackful of matchpoints
because East-West could score at least nine tricks in hearts. If East plays the
contract, it requires a double-dummy low spade lead (or the A followed by a low
spade switch) to defeat 4. North would then win with the Q and switch to a
diamond before the clubs were established for discards.

16 Enter the Illusionist | 177

 Next we will see a psychic overcall. On the first board of a match against
Sweden, with neither side vulnerable, this was the start to the auction:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Fredin Svendsen Fallenius Brogeland
pass 1 ?

Boye held these cards in the South seat:

97 — AKJ8643 8432

What would you have bid?

Boye will describe the action on this one:

I guess you are considering 2, 3 or 4. Against a world class pair such
as Fallenius and Fredin, the 2009 European Pairs winners, I didn’t think a
diamond pre-empt would do much damage. Even if it did and they missed
a 4-4 fit in hearts, it could be the wrong thing to do with the hearts
breaking badly.
With a passed partner you have more leeway to do extraordinary
things in the bidding. Bridge, like poker, is a positional game, and I thought
this was the time and place for a bluff. A cheap one too: 1NT!
Peter Fredin, a well-known bridge illusionist himself, doubled. Partner
passed (a good sign as he probably didn’t have five hearts), Fallenius
passed and I was back in the hot seat. What now?
I am pretty sure you are thinking: ‘2, what else?’ and probably it is
the right bid. But when I have a winning hand I like to suck’em in. So I tried
2, hoping that someone would double. Fredin was right there with the
axe, obligingly, and after two passes it was my bid again.
I know I am going to bid 2 but I don’t want to do it too fast or too
slowly, which would have been unethical. I try to find the perfect tempo
to put 2 on the bidding tray. My heart is pounding — will I really be able
to buy this in 2 doubled when the opponents have at least a nine-card
heart fit?
Fredin whacks me again, and everybody seems to be happy when it is
passed out. I certainly am! This was the full layout:

178 | Bridge at the Edge

 Neither Vul.  A 10 8 3 2010 Euro Championships
Dealer North  7 5 4 3 Norway - Sweden
 2
 Q976
 6 4  KQJ52
 A J 10 8 2 N  KQ96
 Q 10 7 W E  95
S
 KJ5  A 10
 97
 —
 AKJ8643
 8432

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Fredin Svendsen Fallenius Brogeland
pass 1 1NT
dbl pass pass 2
dbl pass pass 2
dbl all pass

Fredin leads the 6. I win with dummy’s ace, cash the AK and eventually
set up a club trick for plus 180.
Hands like this are match winners. For one thing you collect 12 IMPs
when your teammates score the obvious 420 in 4. Much more important
is the momentum you gain. With 19 boards left to play in the match, your
opponents feel gutted and hustled. After this start they will not be able
to play anything remotely close to their A-game — trust me, I’ve been
there. Bridge at the top level is more than anything a game of psychology.

Out-and-out psychic bids are somewhat rare nowadays but it has become part of
the modern game to respond to partner’s opening bid on very weak hands. You pay
out occasionally when partner has a strong hand and will not let the bidding drop
until you have climbed too high. Many more times, you will make life difficult for
your opponents. Let’s see an example of this tactic:

16 Enter the Illusionist | 179

 N-S Vul.  95 1997 Euro Junior Championships
Dealer West  J7653 Norway - Poland
 J8
 AQJ8
 J 10  8763
 Q 10 2 N  K84
 K Q 7 6 5 2 W E  10 4 3
S
 K6  10 7 5
 AKQ42
 A9
 A9
 9432

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Saur Kielichowski Brogeland Grzejdziak
1 pass 1 pass
2 pass pass dbl
pass 2 2NT dbl
3 dbl 3 pass
pass 3 pass 3
all pass

With the vulnerability in his favor, Boye ventured a 1 response. More players
would follow this tactic today than was the custom back in 1997, when this deal
was played. South had nothing to say over this but he re-opened with a double
when West’s 2 rebid ran back to him. North bid 2 and Boye felt that one more
effort was required to prevent the opponents from bidding the game that seemed
to be available to them. He bid 2NT, indicating that he wanted to compete in one
of the minor suits.
South doubled to show a good hand, and North doubled Øyvind Saur’s 3,
which had shown tolerance for clubs if East’s 2NT was based on long clubs. Boye
corrected to 3 and the opponents’ bidding eventually drew to a halt in 3. Four
tricks in each black suit, plus the two red aces, gave declarer an easy overtrick. It
is not always easy to overcome such tactics, as you see.
When you have a notrump contract in mind, it is an old ploy to open a weak
minor suit. In Victor Mollo’s splendid series, Bridge in the Menagerie, the Hideous
Hog was a master of such deception: ‘You play the weakest minor, of course?’ was
often heard when Hog cut Hog.
Boye had no doubt which was his weaker minor on this deal:

180 | Bridge at the Edge

 Both Vul.  K J 5 3 2010 Life Master Pairs
Dealer East  Q 10 8 4 New Orleans, Louisiana
 953
 10 2
 4 2  10 9 8 7 6
 J 6 3 2 N  A7
 A K J 8 7 W E  Q6
S
 87  J643
 AQ
 K95
 10 4 2
 AKQ95

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
pass 1 (!)
pass 1 pass 2NT
pass 3 pass 3NT
all pass

Boye will take over the narrative on this one:

I have to admit that I like preparing for notrump when I have a balanced
hand with a weak minor suit. When it goes all pass, I look pretty stupid,
but after reaching every other contract it can be hard for the opponents
to find the right lead. Over a jump to 2NT (18-19) we use transfers, so 3
from partner showed 4-4 in the majors.
West had no problems finding a diamond lead, starting with the K.
East followed with the 6 and I played the 2, trying to discourage another
diamond from West. (As declarer you should use the same signals as the
opponents. If you want them to continue the suit, encourage; if you prefer
that they switch suit, discourage.)
After a few seconds, West switched to the 4. East played the 6
and I won my ace. This didn’t look promising. Even five club tricks would
only make a total of eight. There was a small chance of a stepping-stone
squeeze in diamonds and spades if I had five club tricks and ran them, but
I decided to go for a more cunning play. At Trick 3 I led the 4 from my
hand!
West put in the J, and East, shaking his head, won with the Q and
returned the 6. With diamonds 5-2, as every card and every grimace by
the opponents suggested, I was back in the ballgame. What now?
Thinking about Vacant Spaces, with the diamonds 5-2, I could have
played righty for Jxxx and let the club ride. But the 6 didn’t look like

16 Enter the Illusionist | 181

 an attitude card; also, with the A in the East hand I didn’t need more
than four club tricks. So I played three rounds of clubs from the top, West
following with the 8, the 7 and then discarding a spade. What now?
With only three club tricks I had no chance of making if West had the
A, so I placed East with that card. I cashed the Q and exited with a
club to East’s jack. East played a spade to dummy, and both I and West
threw a diamond. Do you have a full count of the hand now? This was the
position I had reached:

 K
 Q 10 8
 —
 —
 —  10 9
 J 6 3 2 N  A7
 — W E  —
S
 —  —
 —
 K95
 —
 9

West had started with two spades, two clubs and five diamonds, so he
must have four hearts. That leaves East with five spades, two hearts,
two diamonds and four clubs. Cashing dummy’s fourth spade would give
the opponents five tricks (two diamonds plus one in each of the other
suits), so I played a heart to the king. Leaving the last club uncashed too,
I continued with a heart to the ten and ace. East’s spade return gave the
last two tricks to the dummy and plus 600 gave us 38 out of 38 match
points.’

Next we see a deal involving deceptive defense. Boye is sitting East.

182 | Bridge at the Edge

 E-W Vul.  K Q 10 9 6 2008 European Championship
Dealer North  73 Norway - Turkey
 J654
 A3
 7 3  AJ542
 Q 6 5 4 N  J
 Q 10 W E  932
S
 Q9754  KJ62
 8
 A K 10 9 8 2
 AK87
 10 8

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Lindqvist Atabey Brogeland Assael
1 pass 2
pass 2 pass 3
pass 3 pass 4
all pass

Espen Lindqvist led a third-and-fifth 4 and declarer ducked this to Boye’s K.
With the spades under control there was no hurry to dislodge dummy’s A. Boye
returned the J, declarer winning with the ace. What are your plans for the defense,
sitting East, when declarer plays the 8 to West’s 7 and dummy’s 10? These were
Boye’s thoughts:

My instinct tells me to win deceptively with the A and return a club, but
at the last second, I chicken out. I do not feel we have complete control of
the trumps (although declarer would certainly have cleared trumps unless
Espen has a trick in that suit). I convince myself that declarer will go
down if I do not give him a trick. I think he will finesse in diamonds, or that
partner even may have two trump tricks. Therefore I win with the J just
as my grandmother would have done. I return a club. But declarer has no
option in diamonds; there is no finesse. He simply pulls trumps and bangs
down the two top diamonds to take nine red tricks and the ace of clubs.
I am furious with myself! When I play in the zone, I have such false cards
on the fingertips. I had all the information and only needed some guts to
produce the magic. How could I miss this opportunity? It is nauseating!
If I had won with the A and played a club, I can guarantee that declarer
would try to cash the good spades to discard his low diamonds. Placing
Espen with the J, he would have no reason to fear a ruff from him.

16 Enter the Illusionist | 183

On the next deal a deceptive hold-up by Boye led to a pretty ending:

E-W Vul.  8 5 3 2 2001 Bermuda Bowl final

Dealer South  A Q Norway - USA
 J743
 A97
 A 7 6  KJ94
 K 7 3 2 N  10 5 4
 K 10 8 W E  652
S
 K 10 4  852
 Q 10
 J986
 AQ9
 QJ63

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Martel Sælensminde Stansby
1NT (12-14)
pass 2 pass 2
pass 2NT all pass

Boye led the 3, playing third-and-fifth leads, and dummy’s Q won. When Lew
Stansby led a diamond at Trick 2, East played the 2 to show an odd number of
cards and declarer finessed the queen. Seeing that declarer would score an easy
three diamond tricks if he won, Boye tried the effect of holding up the K.
Stansby continued with the Q, covered by the K and A. His next move
was to lead dummy’s J, hoping to pin an original 108 with West. Not today.
Boye won with the K and led a heart to dummy’s bare ace, freeing a trick for his
K and leaving dummy’s diamond holding blocked. Declarer continued with jack
and another club, throwing Boye on lead.
Boye paused for thought. If East held the J, it was possible that declarer had
the K. Erik had discouraged on the first round of hearts, so Boye placed declarer
with the J. In that case he had 10 points outside spades and was likely to hold
only the Q (because he had rejected the 2NT game try). Boye switched to ace and
another spade, allowing the defenders to score four tricks in the suit. This was the
position as Erik led his last spade:

184 | Bridge at the Edge

 8 
— 
74 
— 
 —  9
 K 7 N  10
 10 W E  6
S
 —  —
 —
 J9
 A
 —

Declarer was caught in a defensive squeeze. If he discarded the A, Boye would
score a trick in each red suit. When he chose to throw the 9, Boye discarded the
10 and claimed the last two tricks in hearts. +300!
The next deal was played in Tenerife, an island that became famous when a
well-known English bridge writer and his wife chose it for their honeymoon, way
back in 1975.

N-S Vul.  AKQ6 2005 European Open

Dealer East  K32 Norway - San Marino
 9
 AQJ43
 J 8 4 2  10 9 5
 J 9 7 N  A84
 K J 10 4 W E  8762
S
 10 8  K97
 73
 Q 10 6 5
 AQ53
 652

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Fazzardi Sælensminde Zucchini
pass pass
1 (!) dbl 2 dbl
pass 3 pass 3
pass 3 pass 3NT
all pass

They say that ‘anything goes’ in the third seat at favorable vulnerability. Quite so,
and Boye was there with a 1 opening. There was no resultant good fortune in

16 Enter the Illusionist | 185

the bidding, however, with the opponents brushing the psychic opening aside and
arriving in the best contract played by the right hand.
A diamond lead would have made life easy for declarer but Boye reached for
the 2, won in the dummy. When Piergiovanni Zucchini continued with the A
and Q, Erik Sælensminde won with the K and switched to the 8. Sitting
South, how would you play to this trick?
Declarer had eight top tricks and a seemingly easy ninth by leading through
West’s presumed A to dummy’s K. He rose with the A, Boye unblocking
the J. Declarer led a heart to the king and was amazed to see this lose to East’s ace.
Sælensminde continued with the 7 and, thanks to Boye’s previous unblock of the
J, the defenders took three diamonds for one down.
Have you ever seen someone make a natural bid in notrump with a void in the
opponents’ suit? Zia Mahmood achieved the feat here:

N-S Vul.  J 6 5 4 2003 Icelandair Open

Dealer South  K Q 10 2 Reykjavik
 J74
 83
 K Q 9 3  A 10 8 7 2
 9 7 3 N  A654
 Q 9 8 6 W E  A 10 3
S
 52  Q
 —
 J8
 K52
 A K J 10 9 7 6 4

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Zia
1
pass 1 1 1NT (!)
2 pass pass 4
all pass

Sensing a big spade fit for East/West, Zia attempted to cloud the issue with a psychic
rebid of 1NT. West raised to 2 and this ran back to Zia. Since a club game was
still possible he jumped to 4, causing a few puzzled looks around the table. There
was no further bidding and West led the K.
Zia ruffed the spade lead and played the A, dropping the Q from East. It
did not escape his attention that the 8 was now an entry to dummy. He played
the J, which won, followed by the 8 to dummy’s K. West had signaled his
count in hearts and East won the second round. A low diamond would have put
Zia to a guess but East returned a spade, ruffed in the South hand. Zia crossed to

186 | Bridge at the Edge

the 8 and discarded two diamonds on the Q10 to make eleven tricks for a score
of +150. This gave him a better result than those pairs who had picked up +50 or
+100 by defending a spade contract.
We will end the chapter with an amazing deal from Boye’s early days:

Both Vul.  Q J 6 4 1994 Bergen

Dealer North  A Q J 10 8 regional tournament
 KJ6
 7
 A K 9 8 2  10 5 3
 9 4 3 N  K75
 8 2 W E  Q5
S
 Q85  J 10 9 6 2
 7
 62
 A 10 9 7 4 3
 AK43

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Charlsen Sælensminde Høyland Brogeland
1 pass 2
pass 3 pass 6
all pass

You like Boye’s 6? Ever since playing three-handed bridge with his grandparents
he has loved to ‘bid what I think I can make’. West led the K and, after some
thought, switched to a heart. How would you play the slam?
The only serious technical chance is to finesse the Q. However, Boye was
absolutely certain that West did not hold the K. If that were the case, he would
surely have attempted to cash another top spade or (if he rated the South player as
a very wild bidder) played his partner for the A. Following his judgment, Boye
rose with the A and immediately called for the Q!
Believing that South held only one heart, East followed with the 7. After such
a majestic coup in hearts it would have been unjust if there was a trump trick to be
lost. No, the trumps broke 2-2 and Boye made the slam.
Perhaps you are unimpressed and think that no East player at your club would
be fooled by such a ruse. It’s not the right reaction. Sam Inge Høyland is a strong
player — a Norwegian international. Instead you should tuck away the important
message that you must follow your instinct at this game. If you truly believe that
the cards lie in a particular way, do not follow a line of play that would then lead
to defeat.

16 Enter the Illusionist | 187

 17
Extracting the Maximum
Penalty

Once in a while you double the opponents in an unfortunate spot and there is no
escape for them. Your task is only half done. It is essential in such circumstances
to assume the role of a Victorian hanging judge — inflicting the maximum sentence
on your poor victims. In this chapter we will see some examples of such merciless
behavior.
On the first deal, South chose an unlucky moment to enter with the Unusual
Notrump. He was made to pay the maximum price.

Neither Vul.  Q 10 7 5 1996 Junior European

Dealer West  K Q 10 6 4 Norway - Turkey
 83
 54
 8 3  AK942
 A 8 7 3 2 N  J9
 10 9 W E  K652
S
 KQ63  A 10
 J6
 5
 AQJ74
 J9872

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Saur Brogeland
pass pass 1 2NT
dbl pass pass 3
pass pass dbl all pass

Since North had declined to choose his better minor, it was quite likely that he held
two cards in each suit. Aiming to prevent any club ruffs in dummy, Øvind Saur
made the accurate lead of the 10. Declarer won with the jack and led his singleton
heart. West went in with the ace and Boye followed with the J, a suit preference
signal for spades.

17 Extracting the Maximum Penalty | 189

 Message received! Rather than returning his remaining trump, Saur switched
to the 8. Boye took his two top winners in the suit and led back the 2, a suit
preference signal for clubs. Declarer discarded a club loser and West ruffed with
the 9. The A and K came next, followed by a low club. Declarer ruffed with
dummy’s 8 and Boye overruffed with the K. Dummy held the top cards in both
major suits at this stage, so Boye exited with a trump. Declarer had to concede a
further trick to West’s Q and that was four down for a penalty of 800. Neatly
done!
Dutchmen, Bauke Muller and Simon de Wijs, defended excellently to take the
maximum from Erik Sælensminde’s contract of 5 doubled here:

Neither Vul.  5 2007 Bermuda Bowl SF

Dealer West  A K 10 9 8 Norway - Netherlands
 KQ74
 K96
 A J 10 7 6 3 2  KQ98
 6 N  Q43
 J 3 W E  A 10
S
 Q53  A J 10 8
 4
 J752
 98652
 742

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Muller Brogeland de Wijs Sælensminde
3 dbl 4 pass
pass dbl pass 4NT
dbl rdbl pass 5
dbl all pass

Erik Sælensminde, sitting South, had an unwelcome decision to make on this deal.
Should he sit for the double of 4, hoping that partner held four tricks in defense,
or should he look for a sacrifice somewhere? He chose the latter option, bidding
4NT to show two places to play, and eventually ended in 5 doubled.
Muller led his singleton heart, won in the dummy, and Erik played the K to
East’s A. The next trick came as something of a surprise. East led the 8 and this
drew the 4, 7 and 5! There could be only one reason for West leaving East on
lead: he wanted a heart ruff. De Wijs duly led the 4 to the next trick. West ruffed
with the J and returned the Q, giving the defenders three club tricks for an 800
penalty.
At the other table the first seven bids were the same but Bas Drijver then
decided to defend against 4 doubled. North cashed the A and switched to the

190 | Bridge at the Edge

Q, won in the dummy. Tor Helness drew trumps and picked up the club suit,
allowing him to discard his diamond loser. That was two doubled overtricks, a
score of +790 and… a flat board!
Extracting the maximum from low-level doubled contracts can be difficult.
Boye and Erik Sælensminde managed to squeeze the last drop from this particular
lemon:

N-S Vul.  A Q 2 2010 Spingold QF

Dealer South  A J 9 7 Meltzer - Strul
 Q5
 QJ93
 9 5  KJ74
 K Q 6 4 N  32
 A K 10 7 2 W E  J9
S
 76  A K 10 4 2
 10 8 6 3
 10 8 5
 8643
 85

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Nunes Brogeland Fantoni
pass
1 dbl rdbl 1
pass pass dbl all pass

When Erik Sælensminde led the 7, Fulvio Fantoni played low from dummy and
Boye won with the 10. What should East do next?
Boye could be fairly sure from the opening bid that Erik held the KQ. He
switched to the 3, West playing the Q and dummy winning with the A. Declarer
played a low heart towards his hand and Erik won with the K, continuing with a
third round of hearts. Boye ruffed, cashed the A and continued with a low club.
When Fantoni chose to ruff with the 8, Erik overruffed with the 9 and cashed
the AK. A third round of diamonds gave Fantoni another decision on how high
he should ruff. This time he assigned dummy’s A to the task.
Declarer had scored two tricks and it seemed he would score two more. It did
not turn out that way. Fantoni led dummy’s J and Boye ruffed with the J, South
discarding his last diamond. East was on lead in this position:

17 Extracting the Maximum Penalty | 191

  Q2
 —
 —
 Q
 5  K7
 — N  —
 7 2 W E  —
S
 —  K
 10 6 3
 —
 —
 —

Boye led the K and Fantoni was faced with yet another decision in the trump
suit! He now had to guess whether West’s remaining trump was the 7 or the 5.
He chose to ruff with the 10, playing West for the 7, and then had to lose two
further trump tricks to Boye’s K7. He was 1100 down at the one-level.
Perhaps you are expecting the final deal of this chapter to feature a penalty
even bigger than 1100. You will have to wait and see. It certainly features a fine
defense by Odin Svendsen.

N-S Vul.  7 5 2 2010 Euro Championship

Dealer East  10 8 7 6 Norway - Germany
 Q
 K6543
 8  KQJ6
 A Q 5 4 2 N  KJ3
 K 9 6 3 W E  5
S
 QJ7  A 10 9 8 2
 A 10 9 4 3
 9
 A J 10 8 7 4 2
 —

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Gromoeller Svendsen Kirmse
1 1
dbl pass 1 1
4 pass pass 4
dbl all pass

192 | Bridge at the Edge

Boye’s double showed at least four hearts (part of the method known as ‘transfers
over an overcall’, described in Chapter 18). Svendsen rebid 1 with his three-card
support and it was easy then for Boye to bid game in hearts.
What do you think of the way that South bid his hand, eventually sacrificing in
4? He had 7-5 shape, it is true, but his suits were not particularly robust. Perhaps
he would have done better to show his playing strength earlier, bidding 2 rather
than 1. He could then have left any further bidding to his partner.
The deal presented an instructive defensive point, as we will see. Boye led the
Q, ruffed by declarer. He cashed the A, dropping dummy’s Q, and advanced
the J. When Boye played low smoothly, declarer ruffed with dummy’s 2 and
was overruffed with the 6. Svendsen returned the K, won with the A, and this
position had been reached:

 7
 10 8 7 6
 —
 K654
 —  QJ
 A Q 5 4 2 N  KJ3
 K 9 W E  —
S
 J7  A 10 9 8
 10 9 4
 9
 10 8 7 4 2
 —

Declarer led the 8, covered by the 9, and ruffed with dummy’s last trump (the
7). If Svendsen overruffs in the East seat, declarer will be able to ruff the second
round of hearts and set up three diamond tricks while maintaining trump control.
He will escape for two down and a penalty of just 500. (This was the penalty
conceded in the same contract at the other table, where Thomas Charlsen took a
better view by running the J at Trick 3.)
Svendsen made no such mistake! He discarded a club on the trick. When
declarer led a heart from the table, Svendsen rose with the K and drew two rounds
of trumps. A heart continuation forced South’s last trump and he lost the remaining
tricks, going five down for a penalty of 1400. That was 14 IMPs to Norway.

17 Extracting the Maximum Penalty | 193

 18
Extending the Use of
Transfer Bids

The use of transfer bids increases year on year. In this chapter we will look at five
different areas of bidding where transfer bids may be new to you.

Transfer responses to 1
Almost everyone uses transfer bids opposite 1NT, bidding 2 with hearts and 2
with spades. A similar scheme works well opposite 1. A response of 1 shows
four or more hearts; 1 shows four or more spades.
After a start of 1 - 1, the opener rebids 1 on most hands with three-card
heart support. When the responder is weak and holds only four hearts, he can pass
or sign off in 1NT. When he is stronger, with only four hearts, he can bid a new suit
(including 2) or make a higher bid in notrumps. When the responder holds five
or more hearts an eight-card fit has been found. He can sign off in 2 or invite a
game with 3. A further option is a mini-splinter (including 3), showing at least
game-try values.

18 Extending the Use of Transfer Bids | 195

 Right, that’s the theory. Let’s see the method in action:

Both Vul.  Q 9 6 2010 Euro Championship

Dealer South  A 7 5 4 3 Norway - Finland
 K 10 8 6 3
 —
 J 10 8 4  A7532
 K 8 N  10 9 6
 A 5 W E  QJ97
S
 98742  10
 K
 QJ2
 42
 AKQJ653

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Koistinen Brogeland Elsinen Svendsen
1
pass 1 pass 1
pass 3 pass 3
pass 4 pass 4
pass 4 all pass

Odin Svendsen’s 1 showed any hand of up to around 17 points that contained

three-card heart support. Boye’s 3 was a splinter bid, showing five or more hearts
and at least invitational strength. The opener’s 3 was a cuebid, 4 showed a void
club and 4 was a (very frisky) ‘last train’ slam try. Such a bid, barely justified on
the South cards here, indicates slam interest and does not promise any control in
the diamond suit. A last train bid may be used when it is the only bid available
below game-level in the agreed trump suit.
It is often a question of luck whether a transfer bid happens to make the right
hand declarer. Here the method worked well and West started with an unfortunate
J lead, East’s A dropping the K from declarer. The contract cannot be beaten
after this opening salvo. East in fact returned a spade into dummy’s tenace and
Svendsen was able to ditch both his diamonds. A trump to the jack lost to the king
and West returned a trump to the ace. Declarer then drew the last trump and ran
the clubs, ending with an overtrick.
At the other table the Finnish North responded with a natural 1 and ended
as declarer in 4. East led the Q, West winning and returning a diamond to
declarer’s king. What can declarer do now? If he plays a trump to the queen and
king, West will cross to partner’s A and a diamond will promote an extra trump
trick for the defenders. If instead declarer plays ace and another trump, West
will win and cross to the A; the J will then force dummy’s J, promoting East’s

196 | Bridge at the Edge

10. Declarer in fact played a spade himself and a third round of diamonds then
established two trump tricks for the defense — one down.
We mentioned that the sequence 1 - 1 - 1 is non-forcing. The opener may
therefore have to find another bid when he has three-card heart support and 18-19
points. 2NT is available and the responder may then rebid his hearts to seek a 5-3
fit in the suit.
What does the opener do when he has four-card support for partner’s indicated
major? He rebids at the two-level with a minimum hand (11-13 points), or 14 with
3-4-3-3 shape. So, the sequence 1 - 1 - 2 shows a minimum hand with four-
card heart support. If that seems strange to you, remember that it is the equivalent
of a standard 1 - 1 - 2 auction. With a stronger hand, the opener can raise the
hearts to a higher level.
When the opener does not hold support for the suit indicated by partner’s
transfer response, he rebids naturally. That’s what happened on this deal:

Neither Vul.  A K J 2 2010 Euro Championship

Dealer South  A K 10 4 Norway - Wales
 A54
 10 6
 9 7 6 5  83
 J 9 8 7 N  Q63
 J 6 2 W E  Q 10 9 8 3
S
 83  KQ4
 Q 10 4
 52
 K7
 AJ9752

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

D.Jones Svendsen G.Jones Brogeland
1
pass 1 dbl 2
pass 2 pass 2
pass 2 pass 2NT
pass 4 pass 5
pass 6 all pass

Odin Svendsen’s 1 response showed hearts and East’s double indicated a good
holding in diamonds. Boye’s 2 rebid denied three-card heart support and showed
at least six clubs. With a minimum 3-2-3-5 hand he would have passed instead (or
perhaps rebid 1NT if he held a diamond stopper).
North continued with 2, a game force. Since Boye had already denied three
hearts, he could bid 2, keeping the bidding low on his minimal hand. 2 and

18 Extending the Use of Transfer Bids | 197

2NT were natural bids and then came 4, a clear slam try in clubs. Boye declined
to cuebid his diamond control on such a weak hand but Svendsen had no intention
of staying out of a slam and raised to 6.
How would you play the slam when West leads the 2?
Boye won the diamond lead with the ace and led the 6. It would be a mistake
to lead the 10 instead, since you would then lose two trump tricks if East covered
with a singleton K or Q. East played low and declarer’s 9 won the trick.
When clubs broke 3-2, there was only one loser and the slam was made.
To end this section, take a look at the complete list of responses available
opposite partner’s 1 opening:

1 shows at least four hearts

1 shows at least four spades
1 denies a major
1NT 11-12, balanced
2 inverted minor raise
2 6-9 points with at least five clubs
2NT 13-15 or 19-20, with 3-3-3-4 or 3-3-4-3 shape
3 preemptive (not invitational even if partner has 18-19)
3/3/3 void-showing with 5+ clubs
3NT 16-18 with 3-3-3-4 or 3-3-4-3 shape

The 1 response is not available when you hold diamonds, of course, so you would
respond 1 instead. This response also covers balanced hands that contain no
major suit and are not strong enough for the medium-range 1NT response.

Transfers over an overcall of 1 or 1

Transfers are also useful after a one-level red-suit overcall by your right-hand
opponent. Suppose the bidding starts like this:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

1 1 ?

East can choose from these alternatives:

dbl four or more hearts

1 four or more spades
1 denies four or more in a major
1NT 11-12 points, balanced
2 natural, raise in clubs
2 cuebid, showing strong club raise
2 fit jump (five hearts and four or more clubs, 6-9)
2 fit jump (five spades and four or more clubs, 6-9)

198 | Bridge at the Edge

The response of 1 is a catch-all for those hands that do not contain a four-card
major. Since 1NT shows 11-12 points, you would use the 1 response on hands
that would normally respond 1NT but contain only 6-10 points.
The method is similar after a 1 overcall. Suppose the bidding starts like this:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

1 1 ?

East can choose from these alternatives:

dbl four or more spades

1 denies four or more spades
1NT 11-12 points, balanced
2 natural raise in clubs
2 natural and forcing
2 cuebid, showing strong club raise
2 fit jump, five spades at least four clubs, 6-9

Again, 1 is used as a catch-all for those hands that do not fit into the other
categories.
Erik Sælensminde used the spade-showing double on this deal:

N-S Vul.  A Q 10 5 4 2007 Bermuda Bowl final

Dealer South  7 6 Norway - USA 2
 QJ9
 J73
 J 7 3  K982
 Q J 8 3 2 N  A95
 A K 10 7 W E  8652
S
 8  94
 6
 K 10 4
 43
 A K Q 10 6 5 2

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Rosenberg Sælensminde Zia Brogeland
1
1 dbl 2 3
pass 3 dbl 3NT
all pass

18 Extending the Use of Transfer Bids | 199

Sælensminde showed at least four spades with his double. Over Zia’s raise to 2
another convention came into play. Boye could use the Weak-Strong 2NT to show
two different types of 3 rebid. His actual 3 showed full values, a hand on which
he would have jumped to 3 anyway. The alternative was a conventional 2NT.
Partner would then continue bidding on the assumption that partner held a weaker
type of 3 bid — in other words, one based on extra shape but otherwise close to
minimum.
Sælensminde asked for a heart stopper and the partnership duly arrived in
3NT, which was easily made. There was some interest in the other auction too:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Tundal Jacobs Grøtheim Katz
1
1 dbl 2 3
3 4 all pass

West’s continuation to 3 robbed North of the opportunity to use this bid himself.
He might have passed a similar message with a competitive double, again giving
South the opportunity to bid 3NT. His actual choice was 4, which was as high as
you want to be in that denomination.

Switch bids over an overcall of 1 or 2

When your partner’s opening bid is overcalled with 1 or 2, there are two unbid
suits that you can show at the two-level. Considerable advantage can be obtained
by switching the meaning of these two suit-bids. Suppose the bidding starts like
this:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

1 1 ?

A double and 1NT hold their usual meanings, with the negative double strongly
suggesting at least four hearts. In addition, East can use these two switch bids:

2 shows at least five hearts, invitational plus

2 shows at least five clubs, invitational plus

A cuebid (2) would show at least invitational support of diamonds.

One obvious advantage of switch bids is that East can respond 2 on a moderate
hand (9-11 points) with five or more hearts and come to rest in 2. A standard
response of 2 would have been forcing, perhaps carrying the bidding too high.

200 | Bridge at the Edge

 After a start of 1 (1) 2, where 2 is a switch bid showing hearts, the opener
rebids along these lines:

2 at most two hearts, not especially strong

2 at most two hearts, extra values
3 at least three hearts, forcing
4 at least three hearts, good 12-14

All other bids are natural and show a hand that is not prepared to stop in 2
opposite a minimum switch bid.
Similarly, when an opening bid of 1 or 1 is overcalled with 1, the two-level
responses in the remaining suits are switched. For example, after a 1 opening
overcalled with 1, 2 would show diamonds and 2 would show clubs.
Switch bids apply only after a black-suit overcall. This is the situation when
the overcall is in clubs:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

1 2 ?

There is no change to the negative double. In addition, East can use these two
switch bids:

2 shows at least five spades, invitational plus

2 shows at least five hearts, invitational plus

The same scheme applies when an opening bid of 1 or 1 is overcalled with 2.
There will be two bids in new suits available at the two-level. The suits shown by
these two bids will be switched.
When the responder has extra values, he will bid again at his second turn:

West East
 A Q 9 6 5  8
 J 5 N  K Q 10 9 6 2
 A 10 7 2 W E  Q93
S
 Q3  KJ7

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

1 2 2 pass
2 pass 3 pass
4 all pass

East is too strong to pass 2 and makes a game-try, which West is happy to accept.

18 Extending the Use of Transfer Bids | 201

 Here the switch bid allows East to describe two aspects of his hand, while
keeping the bidding low:

West East
 8 7  AK632
 A K 6 4  Q8
 A 10 8 5 3  Q62
 Q 2  973

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

1 2 2 pass
2 pass 3 all pass

East shows his spade suit, which does not elicit a fit, and is then able to show some
diamond support. West sees no reason to bid further and a sensible contract is
reached.
Let’s see an exciting competitive deal that includes a switch bid:

Both Vul.  Q 9 6 4 2 2010 Euro Championship

Dealer East  K 2 Norway - France
 J7654
 6
 —  KJ8
 Q 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 N  AJ
 K 9 W E  A Q 10 3 2
S
 K 10  A54
 A 10 7 5 3
 —
 8
 QJ98732

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Svendsen Chemla Brogeland Levy
1 2
2 dbl 3 4
5 pass 6 6
pass pass dbl all pass

Odin Svendsen’s 2 response was a switch bid showing at least five hearts. Paul
Chemla doubled, to show spades, and Alain Levy eventually ended in 6 doubled,
a sacrifice over the making 6.
Svendsen led the K, winning the first trick, and continued with the 9.
Declarer does best to cover this with the J, bolstering the value of dummy’s

202 | Bridge at the Edge

diamond pips. He played low, which allowed Boye to play low too, and the trick
was ruffed in the South hand.
Svendsen won the Q with the K and switched to the Q, covered by the
king and ace. South ruffed and continued with a club ruff, followed by a low trump
lead from dummy. This was the second key moment in the play. If Boye plays the
8, declarer will have the chance to insert the 10. He would then establish the
clubs with a ruff, return to the A and play good clubs, escaping for only two down!
The position was clear to Boye and he inserted the J. Levy won with the
A and ruffed the clubs good. He could not make any use of them, however. He
ruffed a heart with the 7 and led the 8. Boye ruffed with the 8, drew a round
of trumps with the K and scored the A and Q. Dummy’s Q took the last trick
and the penalty was 1400.
We wonder if you will believe the bidding at the other table. Christian Mari
opened 2NT on the East cards and Bjorn Olav Ekren overcalled 4. This set the
French West, Frederic Volcker, a difficult problem. Eventually he bid 6NT! Mari
won the Q lead with the K and played a heart to the jack, finessing against
North because South had so many more clubs that North. 6NT was made with an
overtrick and France gained 2 IMPs for the 1470 that edged ahead of 1400.

Transfers over a takeout double

We will look next at the use of transfer bids over an opponent’s takeout double.
Suppose the bidding starts: 1 - dbl. The next player may bid a forcing 1 with at
least four spades; he may redouble with a strong hand when interested in penalties.
That much is standard. In addition, it works well to play the following bids as
transfers:

1NT shows clubs

2 shows diamonds
2 shows a good raise to 2, about 7-9 points
2 shows a weaker raise to 2, about 2-6 points

You can see the main advantage of such responses. They allow you to show a
modest hand with a long suit. When the opener’s hand is nothing special, he will
honor the transfer and the bidding can stop in two of your suit. A second benefit
is that the opening hand, usually with the greater strength, will play the contract.
This method worked well on the following deal:

18 Extending the Use of Transfer Bids | 203

 Neither Vul.  10 4 3 2008 Euro Championships
Dealer South  J Norway - Germany
 854
 KQJ754
 K Q 8 5  97
 Q 8 3 2 N  764
 K J 6 W E  Q 10 7 3
S
 A9  10 8 3 2
 AJ62
 A K 10 9 5
 A92
 6

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Smirnov Brogeland Piekarek Lindqvist
1
dbl 1NT pass 2
all pass

West led the K and Espen Lindqvist ended with nine tricks.
Some players achieve similar results by playing a 2 response as non-forcing
over a double. Yes, but that makes life more difficult when you hold a strong hand
with clubs. By launching club hands with a 1NT transfer, you can deal well with
both weak and strong hands.
Most bidding conventions involve giving up something to make way for the
bids that are to be used in an artificial way. Here you are acquiring several new
bids and the sacrifice to be made is the surrender of the natural 1NT response over
a double. This is quite a useful bid, it has to be admitted. Nevertheless, the use
of transfers over a double is becoming increasingly popular. Remember too that
you are getting several useful transfer bids by giving up just one natural response.
After a start of 1 - dbl, the responses are similar:

1NT shows clubs

2 shows diamonds
2 shows hearts
2 shows a good raise to 2 (7-9 points)
2 shows a weaker raise to 2 (2-6 points)

Again you have the chance to differentiate between a garbage raise to the two-level
and a sounder raise.

204 | Bridge at the Edge

Transfers opposite partner’s overcall
As we have just seen, nearly all conventions require you to sacrifice the natural use
of one or more bids. You trade the value of the previous usage for the (supposedly
wonderful) advantage of the new convention. We will end this chapter with a
convention that has no downside whatsoever and will buy you a considerable
advantage when responding to partner’s overcalls.
Look at this situation:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

1 2 pass ?

There are three suit bids between the overcall and a raise of the overcall. These are
their traditional meanings:

2 cuebid, showing a strong diamond raise

2 natural
3 natural

When you use ‘transfers opposite an overcall’, you jumble these three bids with no
loss whatsoever:

2 transfer to spades
2 transfer to clubs
3 showing a strong diamond raise

So, the bid that would be a transfer to partner’s suit shows a strong raise of that suit.
3 is still available for the weaker raise.
Great method, isn’t it? If you have a moderate hand with a spade suit, you can
bid 2. Partner will rebid 2 on most hands and you can stop there. If you happen
to hold a stronger hand, you will have the opportunity to bid again.
Whatever the opening bid and the overcall, there will always be three suit bids
available and you can re-order these from the traditional meanings to give you two
transfer bids and a cuebid strong raise. Look at this, much higher, situation:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

3 4 pass ?

The three available suit bids will now have these meanings:

18 Extending the Use of Transfer Bids | 205

 4 transfer to 5
5 transfer to 5
5 showing a strong raise to 5

It is unlikely that you would want to correct the contract from 4 to 5, it is true.
A much more likely scenario is that you want to make a fit-bid raise to 5, inviting
a slam:

West East
 J 9 2  8
 K 6 2 N  A Q J 10 8 7
W
 A Q J 8 2 E  K43
S
 J3  A 10 7

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

3 4 pass
5 pass 5 pass
5 pass 6 all pass

One cooked-up sample hand proves nothing, you are right, but you get the idea.
It makes no difference what meanings you would normally have assigned to the
three available suit bids in a particular situation. You will benefit by changing their
order, thereby switching two of the three bids into transfers.

206 | Bridge at the Edge

 19
Train Off the Rails!

They say that mistakes can be just as instructive as excellent play. Yes indeed, and
in this chapter we will take a close look at some unsuccessful plays and defenses
made by Boye, his teammates and their opponents. Sometimes there was a good
reason for the ‘wrong’ play; sometimes it was an out-and-out mistake from which
we may all be able to benefit.
The first deal features defense:

E-W Vul.  A J 5 3 2006 Hecht Cup

Dealer South  6 2 Copenhagen, Denmark
 K 10
 QJ832
 10 9 7 2  KQ864
 4 N  K5
 Q J 7 6 2 W E  A4
S
 A 10 6  K954
 —
 A Q J 10 9 8 7 3
 9853
 7

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Blakset Sælensminde Hecht
4
all pass

Boye led the Q, drawing the 10, 4 and 3. Aiming to prevent a diamond
ruff if that suit was 5-2-3-3 around the table, he switched to his singleton trump.
Dummy followed low and declarer won East’s king with the ace.
The defenders did not enjoy what happened next! Declarer crossed to dummy’s
6 and discarded his 7 on the A. He lost three diamond tricks subsequently but
the contract was his.
As you will have noticed, the contract goes down if Erik plays the 5 on the
first round of trumps, retaining his K to deal with dummy’s lowly 6.

19 Train Off the Rails! | 207

 At another table, the defenders went even further astray:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Bertheau Sørensen Nyström Møller
5
pass pass dbl all pass

West led the Q again but at this table declarer covered with dummy’s king. East
won with the ace and returned a second diamond to West’s jack. Continuing
diamonds will result in two overruffs by East and three down. No, West diagnosed
a spade switch. Declarer won with dummy’s A, discarding his club loser, and then
picked up the trumps with a finesse. Declarer’s remaining 98 were good so it was
5 doubled and made!
Boye is a firm believer in following his judgment rather than playing safe. This
policy pays off handsomely in the long run but it cost him a packet when defending
on this deal:

Neither Vul.  8 2010 Spingold

Dealer East  4 New Orleans, Louisiana
 K 10 5 2
 QJ96542
 K 9 5 4  A Q 10 7 2
 7 5 3 2 N  AJ96
 9 8 3 W E  4
S
 83  A 10 7
 J63
 K Q 10 8
 AQJ76
 K

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Lynch Brogeland Passell
1 2
2 5 dbl all pass

Erik Sælensminde led the K and continued with a second spade, ruffed in the
dummy. When Mike Passell led dummy’s singleton heart, Boye rose with the A
and switched to a trump, won in the dummy. Now came the key moment. Declarer
called for the 2. What would your reaction have been in the East seat?
It may seem obvious to rise with the A, ensuring the defeat of the contract.
However, Boye could not believe that declarer held a singleton K. Surely he
would have led a club instead of a heart at Trick 3 in that case? If West held K8
he would be able to win this trick and return a second round of trumps, putting the

208 | Bridge at the Edge

game two down. Few defenders would have the bravery to back their judgment in
such a situation but Boye followed with the 7. Passell won with the K, ruffed
his last spade and led the Q, covered and ruffed. He was then able to ruff the
10 with the K, reach his hand with a high club ruff and draw West’s remaining
trumps. Contract made!
Something different now: both sides bid to an apparently hopeless slam on the
South cards and you have to guess how the contract was allowed to make at one
table. Was it the result of some gargantuan defensive mistake? It’s possible, but the
deal does come from the Bermuda Bowl!

Both Vul.  10 5 4 2 1997 Bermuda Bowl

Dealer West  Q 10 7 Norway - Brazil
 KQ2
 AKJ
 J 8 7  Q96
 A 9 6 4 3 2 N  KJ8
 5 W E  8764
S
 542  10 9 6
 AK3
 5
 A J 10 9 3
 Q873

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
pass 1NT pass 2
pass 2 pass 3
pass 3NT pass 4
pass 5 pass 6
all pass

A word or two on the bidding first: at this time Boye and Erik used 3 as a relay,
asking for further information. When the Stayman response was 2, the opener
responded according to this scheme:

3 four-card diamonds
3 four-card clubs
3 five spades
3NT 4-3-3-3 shape

So, Boye discovered that North was 4-3-3-3, set diamonds as trumps and heard a
club cuebid, denying a heart or spade control. He then bid the slam, hoping that a
heart trick would be the only loser.

19 Train Off the Rails! | 209

 On to the play! At both tables West led the A against the dubious contract
of 6. Can you imagine how Boye was allowed to make the contract?
Perhaps your first idea is that the defenders allowed themselves to be squeezed
in some way. There is no chance of a squeeze, however, since the squeeze card
would have to come from the South hand (in one of the minor suits) and dummy
has no entry in either of the major suits.
No, the answer is much more straightforward than that. The Brazilian East
signaled his enthusiasm for the heart lead by playing the J at Trick 1! West
continued with a heart (saving declarer the trouble of taking a ruffing finesse later)
and this established dummy’s Q for a spade discard.
Fact is stranger than fiction. If a monk in the St. Titus monastery series were to
make such a mistake, the readers would dismiss it as absurd. ‘No-one would defend
like that,’ they would say. But this happened in the Bermuda Bowl. We do not
mention the defender’s name because he is a great player with many championships
to his credit. (At the other table Tor Helness assigned the 8 to the first trick and
the slam went one down.)
Let’s continue with a deal where the kibitzers could hardly believe that a
contract had been allowed to make. Norway faced Israel in the 2008 European
Championship in Pau and this time it was Boye and Espen Lindqvist at the defensive
controls. Let’s follow the deal from Boye’s point of view. Only the opponents are
vulnerable and his right-hand opponent opens 5. What action would you take
on Boye’s hand?

 A K Q 10 8 6 2  K 6 3  K 8  A

These were Boye’s thoughts:

My spinal reflex is to bid 5. But that is the bid I would have chosen with
none of the side-suit honors. After all, we are white against red, and the
Israeli player certainly expects to come close to his bid. I might also jump
to 6, but that would be a wild guess. On a sunny day, I might find Espen
with an ace, or even two, but that is pure speculation. The aces are just
as likely with West and then I risk a double. Coming from Norway I am more
accustomed to grey weather than an abundance of sunrays.
I find what I consider a middle of the road solution: I double. Espen
knows too that opener has a truck-load of clubs and at least nine tricks
in his own hand. I believe I have made something close to a takeout double,
and that Espen will bid with a decent suit. Over 5 or 5 I plan to follow
up with 5, showing a very good hand. Brilliant reasoning, I say to myself
as I place the red bidding card on the tray. Everyone passes, and I have to
find an opening lead. You get to try first, while I think.

Decide what you would have led before reading further.

210 | Bridge at the Edge

 If declarer has ten or eleven clubs we must cash our tricks directly. If I
start with the A and declarer ruffs, he may have no problem finessing one
of my red kings and discarding a loser in the other red suit. Accordingly, I
lead the ace of trumps to take a look at dummy. This is what I see:

 53
 AQ874
 10 7 5 3
 93
 A K Q 10 8 6 2
 K63 N
 K8 W E
S
 A

Partner plays the 8. Decide your next move before reading further.

This is embarrassing. If declarer has nine clubs and two hearts, I have
no idea whether to find the undertrick in spades or diamonds. Switching
to the A would cost if declarer is 0-2-2-9; he would be able to ruff his
hearts good and enter dummy with the 9. A diamond exit may be wrong
in several ways. I would love to take a step back in time and lead what any
normal person would, a high spade. Then I would not be in this agonizing
predicament.
Why did Espen pass? If he takes my double as takeout, his pass
implies no five-card suit. If he has 4-4-4-1 shape my top spade will be
ruffed. He may also be 4-3-5-1 with the A as his only value, thinking it
is safer to take a penalty rather than bid at the five-level. I continue to
explore every angle I can imagine. I turn. I pant. I puff. I suffer. After a
few more excruciating minutes, I hardly know whether I am in Jerusalem,
Mecca or Pau.
But stop. Is not this championship supposed to be mine? Have I
not led the A because it had a divine significance? I will not be led into
temptation just because everybody else will say they would have led a
spade. No, my faith is still pure and strong. Solemnly, I lead the K. This
was the full deal:

19 Train Off the Rails! | 211

 N-S Vul.  5 3 2008 Euro Championship
Dealer South  A Q 8 7 4 Norway - Israel
 10 7 5 3
 92
 A K Q 10 8 6 2  74
 K 6 3 N  J 10 9 5 2
 K 8 W E  9642
S
 A  83
 J9
 —
 AQJ
 K Q J 10 7 6 5 4

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland Ginossar Lindqvist Pachtman
5
dbl all pass

Minus 750! Indeed, it could have been minus 950 if declarer had cashed
his diamonds before crossing to the 9. The result is even more galling
after the good view to double rather than bid the failing 5.

One of Boye’s worst bridge memories arose at the 1994 European Junior
Championship. He was partnering Geir Helgemo, a big name even then, and had
a black moment when playing this spade grand slam against Austria (who were in
last place by a big margin).

Neither Vul.  QJ6 1994 Euro Junior Championship

Dealer West  AKJ854 Papendal, Netherlands
 A9
 A7
 9 8 7 2  —
 6 N  Q9732
 10 5 W E  Q7643
S
 Q J 10 9 4 2  865
 A K 10 5 4 3
 10
 KJ82
 K3

The bidding need not concern us. Boye arrived in 7 and West led the Q. How
would you play the contract?

212 | Bridge at the Edge

 There are twelve tricks on top and a thirteenth might come from ruffing a
diamond in dummy, finessing the J or setting up an extra heart trick. Entering the
confessional with head bowed, Boye takes up the narrative:

It looks so simple, doesn’t it? How is it possible to go down? Well, I let

the Q lead go to my hand as I thought I needed the maximum number of
entries to set up hearts. Then I cashed the A (playing a spade to the
queen would be much better) and found out about the 4-0 break. Suddenly
I couldn’t play the percentage line (at this point) of ruffing a diamond in
dummy, since my only entry to my hand to draw trumps subsequently
was a heart ruff. Nervous as I was for screwing up this hand, I started
with a heart to the ace and a heart ruff low. West overruffed! Looking at
it in retrospect, I should definitely have pulled trumps before going after
hearts, as I can fall back on a diamond finesse (or a heart-diamond show-
up squeeze) if hearts are 5-1. I more or less collapsed after going down in
this grand slam and we lost the match 5-25 in VP, eventually finishing in
4th position.

All bridge players have moments like this, tucked away in the back of their
memories. The fear of losing a close match, or of making some ghastly mistake, is
one of the ingredients of the game that makes it so exciting.
What would your reaction be if you and your partner bid to a small slam in a
major event, missing the ace and king of trumps? Some players would look for a
way to blame the disaster on partner’s bidding. Others would grit their teeth and
never mention the hand again. That’s not the way! Once the event is over, you
should discuss the deal with your partner and see — without any recrimination —
how the hand should have been bid. You will then stand a good chance of avoiding
a similar misfortune in the future.
Let’s take an in-depth look at one such bidding disaster and how an expert pair
react to it. In the 2010 European Championship, playing against Germany, Boye
and Odin Svendsen bid a slam missing the ace and king of trumps. This was the
deal:

19 Train Off the Rails! | 213

 Both Vul.  8 6 4 3 2 2010 Euro Championship
Dealer East  A K 4 Norway - Germany
 A 10
 KQ8
 A  K 10
 Q 9 7 6 2 N  J53
 J 9 8 5 W E  632
S
 10 7 5  J9642
 QJ975
 10 8
 KQ74
 A3

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Kirmse Brogeland Gromoeller Svendsen
pass 1
pass 2NT pass 3
pass 3NT pass 4
pass 5 pass 5
pass 6 all pass

Two trump tricks were lost and that was 13 IMPs away. We mentioned the
Norwegians’ treatment of the Jacoby 2NT in Chapter 5. The 2NT bid announced a
game-forcing raise in spades and 3 showed a non-minimum unbalanced opening
bid. South’s honors were all pulling hard, so that was a reasonable if optimistic
description. Boye could have bid 3 next, asking partner if he held a side-suit
singleton. Since he was well-stocked in both hearts and clubs, there was no direct
benefit to be gained from that option. He preferred to bid 3NT, showing a balanced
hand (often of around 14-15 points) with values in both of partner’s possible
singleton suits.
With a promising hand Svendsen would have made a cuebid now. His actual
bid of 4 showed that he was at the bottom end of the non-minimum range. This
space-consuming response was not what Boye had been hoping for. What should
he do next? RKCB would give some assurance about the trump position but the
likely two-keycard response would say nothing about the vital K. If a keycard was
missing, it was essential that partner held the K. Boye decided to cuebid 5 and
partner’s 5 confirmed that he held the K.
Boye takes over the story now:

Over 5, I should probably have tried a ‘last train’ 5. But would partner
bid 6 with Axxxx-xx-Kxxx-Ax or KJxxx-xx-Kxxx-Ax? So I put him out of
that agony, as I always like to when I think I know the right thing to do, by

214 | Bridge at the Edge

 bidding 6 myself. (I think his hand is borderline both to bid 3 over 2NT,
and especially 5 over 5.) So, that is the story from the table.
Afterwards, my teammate, Thomas Charlsen, suggested I should
show a singleton club (!) by bidding 4 over 3 (all new suits, also 4,
show a singleton — voids are shown directly by a double jump, including
1 — 4). He is right! Partner’s hand would look good with two or three
small clubs or the A (only a singleton club might put him off cuebidding
4, say with AKxxx-xxx-Kxxx-x), so he would normally cuebid 4 if he has
the king. Then I can check for keycards and settle for 5 or 6 accordingly.
So there was a good answer over 3, but I can’t really find one over 4.

You see how valuable such a discussion can be, after you and your partner have
reached an awful contract.
Have you ever seen a freely bid slam go five down undoubled? ‘It wouldn’t
happen at our local club,’ you reply. ‘None of our members bid that badly.’ Not
at your local club, let’s agree with you, but perhaps it could happen in a Bermuda
Bowl final!

E-W Vul.  A K J 6 4 2007 Bermuda Bowl final

Dealer North  J 9 7 6 3 Norway - USA
 —
 QJ5
 5  Q 10 9 8 7 3
 K 5 N  A84
 K J 10 9 5 4 W E  832
S
 9843  10
 2
 Q 10 2
 AQ76
 AK762

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Rosenberg Sælensminde Zia Brogeland
1 pass 2
pass 2 pass 2NT
pass 3 pass 3
pass 3 pass 3
pass 4 pass 6
all pass

Boye’s 2 was forcing to game unless followed by 3, so the bidding was more or
less pre-ordained up to 3. Boye was a bit too strong to sign off in 3NT next, so 3
looks the right move. The train is still on the track at this stage, but… what does

19 Train Off the Rails! | 215

3 mean? Erik intended it as showing extra length in hearts, in case there was a 5-3
fit there. Boye took it as a control-showing cuebid. He cuebid in spades himself
and liked the sound of the further ‘cuebid’ in hearts, leaping to 6.
You may be wondering how the slam went five down. Michael Rosenberg led
a trump and dummy’s queen collected the ten from East. With prospects hopeless,
Boye led a heart from dummy. Zia rose with the A and switched to the 2,
declarer playing the ace. Hoping to throw his two remaining hearts, Boye finessed
the J. This lost to East’s queen and back came another diamond ruffed in the
dummy. When Boye discarded a heart on dummy’s A, Rosenberg ruffed and
cashed the K. A trump exit to the bare J in dummy left declarer with no way
to turn. He could not discard one of his diamonds on the K because West would
ruff. If instead declarer overtook with the K and drew West’s last trump, he would
have two further losers in the diamond suit. Five down for minus 250!
It turned out that Katz and Jacobs had also reached 6, going three down for
minus 150. Only 3 IMPs were lost — not so bad!
We will continue with an exciting grand slam deal. The first problem to be
tackled was… which grand slam to bid.

E-W Vul.  3 2008 Euro Championship

Dealer South  4 2 Norway - France
 A K 10 7 5 3 2
 QJ6
 Q 10 9 5 2  K84
 5 3 N  J986
 8 6 W E  94
S
 K874  10 5 3 2
 AJ76
 A K Q 10 7
 QJ
 A9

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Quantin Brogeland Bompis Lindqvist
1
pass 2 pass 2
pass 3 pass 4
pass 4 pass 4NT
pass 5 pass 5NT
pass 6 pass 7NT
all pass

How should Espen Lindqvist interpret Boye’s 5 RKCB response? On the face of
it, this showed two keycards (the A and K) and the Q. Since Lindqvist held

216 | Bridge at the Edge

the Q, he knew that Boye had decided that his diamonds were long enough for
the partnership not to worry about the trump queen. How many diamonds would
North need to take this view?
Since 4 might be bid on only doubleton support, as indeed it had been,
AK10xxxx might be viewed as inadequate for a 5 response. Lindqvist was
therefore inclined to place Boye with eight diamonds, in which case there would be
thirteen top tricks in 7NT. If Boye held only seven diamonds, then the heart suit
might provide a thirteenth trick anyway.
Lindqvist discovered that Boye had no side-suit king and bid 7NT anyway.
West led the 8 and down went the dummy with only twelve top tricks on view.
Lindqvist won with the Q and cashed both the black aces. He then ran the
diamonds, hoping to add some squeeze possibilities to the main chance that the
hearts would yield an extra trick. This was the position:

 —
 42
 7
 QJ
 Q 10  K
 5 3 N  J986
 — W E  —
S
 K  —
 J
 A K Q 10
 —
 —

The last diamond was led, joined on the table by the K, J and Q. How should
declarer read the cards? East would not throw the K from K10, since declarer
might hold the Q. So West was known to hold the 10. There was no apparent
clue as to the location of the K. If East held that card, hearts would break 3-3; if
West held the K, East would hold four hearts and the odds would favor a heart
finesse.
Lindqvist played the hearts from the top. The J did not fall and that was
a 16 IMP loss compared with the 7 that was bid and made at the other table.
Playing with diamonds as trumps, of course, declarer could establish a thirteenth
trick in hearts by ruffing. It seems that Lindqvist took the right line of play on the
information available. If East held the K he would make the contract 100% of the
time; if West held the K he would make it 33% of the time (when the J lay with
the doubleton holding). That was around a 67% line of play. A heart finesse would
succeed 50% of the time when East held the K and 67% of the time when West
held the K, a total chance of only 58%.

19 Train Off the Rails! | 217

 After failing to win a major US pairs title at his first 25 attempts, Boye and his
partner Erik Sælensminde found themselves in the lead of the 2010 Von Zedtwitz
Life Master Pairs in New Orleans, with only one set of the final to play. Midway
through the session this deal arose:

E-W Vul.  8 2 2010 Life Master Pairs final

Dealer East  K 2 New Orleans, Louisiana
 A Q 10 8 7 4
 Q54
 A  Q 10 7 3
 Q 10 8 6 5 4 N  J9
 K 6 5 3 W E  2
S
 J3  A98762
 KJ9654
 A73
 J9
 K 10

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
pass 1
2 3 pass 3
pass 4 all pass

How would you play 4 on a low heart lead? These were Boye’s thoughts:

3NT looks a better contract — this could be a bad one. Should I have
rebid 3 instead of 3? No point worrying about that now. I win with the
K, call for the 2 (in case East has a stiff queen or ten) and put in the
9. This forces West’s A!
It is incredible how emotions can change during a hand. Suddenly I feel
like a million dollars. I am going to make this contract and win my first big
pairs event after so many near misses — many of them roller-coasters
where I had been leading going into the last session.
I win the heart continuation and play the 9 to dummy’s 10. This
wins and I picture myself making twelve tricks with East holding Q10x and
West Kx or Kxx. When I play the 8 from dummy, East contributes the
10 and I play the J. Unfortunately West pitches a heart. But I still feel
close to a million dollars, since I should be able to ditch my heart loser.
I cash the K and play the J, overtaking with dummy’s Q. Oh no,
East starts thinking and must be out of diamonds. How unlucky! East
will ruff the Q and cross to West’s A for him to cash the setting trick
in hearts. Meanwhile, a bundle of pairs will be making 3NT.

218 | Bridge at the Edge

 For some reason East keeps on thinking. Can he have missed his
partner’s count signal and be thinking that I hold three diamonds? In that
case he may decide to delay his ruff until the next round of diamonds. I
pray for this to happen, since I could then pitch my heart loser.
Eventually East ruffs with his master trump and the million-dollar
man suddenly feels like he has only a dime in his pocket. Back comes a low
club, presumably to West’s ace. As a hopeless gesture I play the K from
my hand. If West wins with the A and fails to cash a heart, by some
miracle, I can cross to dummy’s Q and take a discard. What’s this? My
K wins!
The horrible truth dawns on me. West wasn’t certain to hold the A,
even though it was highly likely after his vulnerable overcall. Since I was
down anyway if West held the A, I should have played the 10 instead. I
could then have won with dummy’s Q and pitched my heart. Playing the
10 was not even a difficult play — it was the normal one. Being 110%
sure, for some weird reason, that West held the A, playing the 10 had
seemed a zero percent chance. It was careless, silly, stupid, you name
it, but it’s the way my mind works at bridge. I can’t help blushing and it
doesn’t make me feel better that we have a lot of kibitzers, Geir Helgemo
among them.

What lesson can be drawn from this? When you encounter an unlucky break, or a
defender finds the one play that you were dreading, somehow you must try to keep
calm and think with a clear head about the rest of the play. It is all too easy for us
to give such advice and very much harder to follow it — even for top international
players.
Did the sad story have a happy ending? We will now see. Boye and Erik
avoided any further misadventure and rated themselves still with a chance of
winning when the last board of the event was placed on the table. Sitting South,
with both sides vulnerable, Boye picked up:

Q753 — A93 AQ8642

Boye will resume the narrative:

West passed, Erik opened 1 (playing five-card majors) and the next player
passed. What do you bid?
If you start with 1, it could get awkward when partner bids 2 or 3.
So I think it is right to respond 2. This is game-forcing in our methods
unless you continue with 3. Not surprisingly, partner bids 2. What
now?
It is tempting to hope for a misfit and bid a non-forcing 3. It is a big
risk, though. If partner has 4-5 or 4-6 shape in the majors, we may miss

19 Train Off the Rails! | 219

 an easy game and end the event with a near-zero board. I decide to ‘go
with the room’ and bid a natural 2, checking for a fit.
Not so good. Partner follows up with 3, making me want to go back
and bid 3. Can you make the winning bid after this start?

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
pass 1 pass 2
pass 2 pass 2
pass 3 pass ?

It doesn’t look promising. With no fit and probably at most 27 high-card

points between us (partner could have jumped to 3 over 2 with 16+ and
a good suit) neither 3NT nor 4 seems likely to make. I know I have forced
to game and it will be a breach of discipline if I pass now, but there is no
law in bridge against reconsidering. The rest of the field for sure won’t
reconsider; they will stick with their game plan. I can’t bring myself to do
that, even on the last board where we might just need an average score to
win the event. It’s too ugly. I know I won’t forgive myself if bidding is wrong
and a further move now costs us the victory. So, game-forcing situation
or not, I decide to pass!
This action can gain in two ways. Game in any denomination may be
a bad contract. Alternatively, it may be a good contract but go down on
a bad lie of the cards. I can imagine Erik’s surprise when he sees my green
Pass card. I hope I have made the right decision. This was the full deal:

Both Vul.  10 6 2010 Life Master pairs final

Dealer North  A Q J 10 9 4 New Orleans, Louisiana
 J87
 K 10
 A J 4 2  K98
 K 7 6 5 N  832
 Q 5 4 2 W E  K 10 6
S
 5  J973
 Q753
 —
 A93
 AQ8642

220 | Bridge at the Edge

 WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH
Sælensminde Brogeland
1 pass 2
pass 2 pass 2
pass 3 all pass

No game is good, as you see. Erik held the precious K, but 3NT would fail
even if the clubs broke 3-2. Playing in hearts, even 3 is too high. However,
Erik recovered from the shock of being left in a partscore and managed to
make nine tricks. We scored 33.5 out of 38 matchpoints and won the Von
Zedtwitz Life Master Pairs, just 6 matchpoints ahead of Italy’s Norberto
Bocchi and Guido Ferraro. A wonderful moment!

19 Train Off the Rails! | 221

 20
In the Fast Lane

We are close to the end of the book and it is time to have some fun! Let’s enjoy
some deals where Boye and his partner took a risk or two and, as a consequence,
large numbers of IMPs or matchpoints changed hands.
The first deal features an electrifying 3NT bid:

N-S Vul.  K 9 8 7 2006 Cavendish Teams

Dealer East  K 5 4 Las Vegas, Nevada
 10 7
 10 8 4 3
 Q J  A6532
 J 2 N  9
 8 6 5 W E  AQJ942
S
 QJ9762  K
 10 4
 A Q 10 8 7 6 3
 K3
 A5

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Del’Monte Brogeland
1 1
2 2 2 3NT (!)
pass pass dbl all pass

After Ishmael Del’Monte’s heart raise, Boye could visualize eight top tricks. A
diamond lead would set up the K for a ninth trick, so why not bid 3NT?
East doubled and Boye bravely stuck his ground. The Q lead was allowed to
win and West continued with the J, covered by the king and ace. East switched to
the J and Boye’s K won the trick. That was two doubled overtricks and a score of
+1150 for North-South — good going, even for regular occupants of the fast lane.
The play in 4 is interesting. A minor-suit lead would defeat the contract, but
how would you tackle the play if the Q is led?

20 In the Fast Lane | 223

 Suppose you ‘do what comes naturally’ and cover with the K. East can win
with the A and switch to the K, setting up a club trick for his partner. When
West wins the second round of spades, he will cash a club trick for one down. To
make the heart game, you must play low from dummy on the first trick. West is
welcome to switch to a club because East will have no club to play when he gains
the lead subsequently with the A! You will eventually discard your club loser on
dummy’s spades.
Textbooks will tell you that around 25 points are needed to attempt 3NT.
When they issue this learned advice they are not referring to players in the fast lane,
of course. For them, a combined total of 20 points is enough:

Both Vul.  J 10 7 5 2009 Bermuda Bowl

Dealer East  5 Norway - China
 A 10 9 6
 A Q 10 5
 3  AK6
 10 8 6 3 2 N  KJ94
 K J 8 5 3 W E  Q4
S
 K8  9762
 Q9842
 AQ7
 72
 J43

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Wang Lindqvist Zhuang Brogeland
1NT pass
2 dbl pass 3NT
dbl pass pass 4
pass pass dbl all pass

Unusually, West’s 2 was natural rather than a transfer. North doubled for takeout
and Boye made an adventurous leap to 3NT. West, who had an unexpected opening
lead in diamonds up his sleeve, ventured a double.
Let’s think about the play in 3NT for a moment. A heart lead will give the
contract no chance because declarer cannot set up the spades before the defenders
are able to claim three heart tricks to go with their AK. What would happen on
West’s intended diamond lead, though?
The answer is that declarer can make the contract provided he rises with the
A on the first trick. This prevents East from winning with the Q and switching
to hearts; at the same time it also blocks the diamond suit. Declarer can set up the
spades, losing two spades and two diamonds at most.

224 | Bridge at the Edge

 After West’s double Boye reconsidered the situation. Perhaps 3NT was not
such an inviting spot after all. He amended the contract to 4 and this time it
was East who doubled. West led a low diamond, ducked to the queen, and East
switched to a heart. Boye rose with the ace and played a trump to the jack, East
playing three rounds of the suit.
With only one heart ruff now available, Boye needed a full four club tricks.
He led a low club to the ten and continued with ace and another diamond, ruffing
in his hand. A second low club saw West’s K hit the table. Boye could now win
with dummy’s A, cross to his J and return to dummy with a heart ruff. He was
then able to ditch his remaining heart loser on the Q for +790. At the other table
Groethe and Tundal sacrificed in 5 doubled, against 4, and went 500 down,
Norway gaining 7 IMPs.
Sometimes 20 points are enough not just for a game but for a slam. Boye, who
bid adventurously on this deal, will describe the action.

E-W Vul.  9854 1998 Norwegian Championship

Dealer North  AKJ Fagernes
 —
 A 10 9 5 4 2
 7 3  K 10 2
 9 6 4 N  Q72
 10 9 8 6 4 3 W E  AKQJ5
S
 87  KQ
 AQJ6
 10 8 5 3
 72
 J63

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Helgemo Sælensminde Helness Brogeland
1 dbl 1
pass 4 pass 4NT
pass 5 pass 6
all pass

It was probably a new experience for Tor Helness to watch his opponents
rocketing into slam with him having a 2NT opening!
For lead purposes I decided to bid my stronger rather than my lower-
ranked four-card suit after the double, and I was pleased to see partner
jump to 4, which promised a diamond void with spade support. Pumped
up by my strong trump holding and the J, I used Keycard Blackwood.
Erik’s 5 response told me that only one keycard was missing (the A is

20 In the Fast Lane | 225

 not relevant since partner has a diamond void), so I gambled on a small
slam.
Helgemo led the 8, which I feared was a singleton. Luckily, Helness
followed with an honor under dummy’s ace and from there on it was
easy. Trump finesse, heart to dummy, another trump finesse, cash the
ace of trumps and give away a club trick. Two hearts and one diamond
disappeared on the good clubs and my other diamond could be ruffed in
dummy. Lucky break, and happy make!

We will continue with a bidding problem. Listen to the auction and see whether
you would find a bid on this South hand:

 K 10 4  K 9 4  10 7  J 7 6 4 3

Only the opponents are vulnerable. East passes, you pass and West opens 1. The
bidding continues:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

pass pass
1 pass 1 pass
2 pass pass ?

They have stopped in 2. Do you feel called upon to make a contribution?
Boye held the South cards and reasoned that the opponents’ lack of ambition
marked his partner with around 10 points or so. He had not found a bid over 1,
white against red, and was therefore likely to have some length in clubs. Surprising
as some would find it, on such a moderate suit, Boye protected with 3. This was
the full deal:

E-W Vul.  A 9 7 1996 Nordic Championships

Dealer East  J 8 7 Norway - Denmark
 K52
 A 10 5 2
 J 8 3  Q652
 A 3 N  Q 10 6 5 2
 A Q J 9 6 3 W E  84
S
 K9  Q8
 K 10 4
 K94
 10 7
 J7643

226 | Bridge at the Edge

 WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH
Sælensminde Brogeland
pass pass
1 pass 1 pass
2 pass pass 3 (!)
all pass

How would you play the contract when West leads ace and another heart?
Boye won with the K and saw that he would need an endplay to avoid losing
a spade trick. His first move was to lead a diamond, preparing to eliminate that
suit. West rose with the ace and returned the Q to dummy’s king. Ace and
another trump put West on lead and he exited with the J, ruffed by declarer.
These cards remained:

 A97
 J
 —
 10 5
 J 8 3  Q652
 — N  Q6
 9 6 3 W E  —
S
 —  —
 K 10 4
 9
 —
 76

Boye threw East on lead with a heart, forcing him to open the spades or concede a
ruff-and-sluff. East did the best that he could, returning the Q, but Boye played
for split honors. He won with the K and finessed dummy’s 9 successfully. That
was nine tricks and the contract.
Boye saw red when he picked up the South cards on the next deal — six hearts
and seven diamonds!

20 In the Fast Lane | 227

 E-W Vul.  K Q J 3 2 2007 Icelandair Teams
Dealer West  10 8 Reykjavik
 K52
 Q73
 A 9 7 5  10 8 6 4
 J 6 5 N  K4
 A 4 3 W E  —
S
 865  A K J 10 9 4 2
 —
 AQ9732
 Q J 10 9 8 7 6
 —

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Gillis Brogeland
pass 1 3 3
3 pass 5 5
pass pass 6 6
dbl all pass

The first two bids were the same at the other table but South then opened his
account with a negative double. This would be fine with something like 4-5 in the
red suits, but negative doubles do not tend to work well with more shapely hands
— there is so little chance that partner will respond in one of your suits. Boye
preferred to bid his suits directly and showed the six-card major first. When the
bidding returned to him, the opponents were in 5. Boye then showed his second
suit, bidding 5. This ran back to East, who persisted with 6. If declarer makes
the most of his cards, he can escape for two down in this contract. Boye was not
willing to let it play, however, and competed with 6. West’s double brought an
eventful auction to a close.
How would you play 6 doubled when West leads the 3?
West had shown good values with his cuebid raise and Boye placed him with
the A. He called for dummy’s K, an essential first move, and East showed out.
A finesse of the Q proved successful and Boye continued with the A and a third
heart, ruffing in the dummy. He could then draw trumps and claim the slam.
Thanks to dummy’s mighty 5, the contract would have made even if West had
started with a doubleton heart!
Look at this bidding problem next. Only the opponents are vulnerable and
they start with a multi 2 (usually based on a weak-two in one of the majors).
Partner passes and your right-hand opponent makes a 2NT relay response. What
would you bid on Boye’s hand in the fourth seat?

 A 9 8 7 6 4  10 8  K 9 8  A K

228 | Bridge at the Edge

The A was likely to be with the 2NT bidder and Boye could visualize that a
diamond lead might be needed to defeat 4. How could he tell partner to lead a
diamond? There was only one answer. Boye overcalled 3!
Perhaps you think this is rather dangerous and that, on a bad day, partner may
sacrifice in 5. That is exactly what happened. This was the full deal:

E-W Vul.  3 2 2001 Euro Championship

Dealer West  6 2 Norway - Bulgaria
 J7543
 8732
 Q  K J 10 5
 K Q J 9 7 4 N  A53
 6 2 W E  A Q 10
S
 J 10 5 4  Q96
 A98764
 10 8
 K98
 AK

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Mihov Sælensminde Nanev Brogeland
2 pass 2NT 3 (!)
3 5 dbl all pass

As you see, a diamond lead was indeed needed to beat a contract of 4. Meanwhile,
Boye landed in 5 doubled. Best defense, which involves removing South’s trump
holding, would pick up an 1100 penalty. West led the Q, Boye winning and
playing another spade. The defenders cashed two heart tricks and switched to
clubs. Boye played the AK, ruffed a spade in dummy, ruffed a club and ruffed
another spade. These cards remained:

 —
 —
 J75
 8
 —  —
 Q N  5
 6 2 W E  A Q 10
S
 J  —
 98
 —
 K9
 —

20 In the Fast Lane | 229

 Boye ruffed dummy’s last club with the 9 and exited with the K. East had to
give the last trick to dummy’s J and the penalty had been held to just 500. That
was a 3-IMP pick-up against the other table’s 620 for 4.
Perhaps you think that Boye picks up more than his fair share of good hands.
The next deal, where he sat South, will not persuade you otherwise.

Both Vul.  J 7 3 2002 Cap Gemini Invitation

Dealer South  8 The Hague, Netherlands
 QJ8
 10 9 8 6 5 2
 A K Q 10 9 4  8652
 9 7 6 N  K542
 5 3 W E  10
S
 73  AKQJ
 —
 A Q J 10 3
 AK97642
 4

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
1
2 pass 4 5
pass 6 all pass

Have you ever heard of a reverse at the five-level? You have now!
A spade lead would make life easy for declarer, who could then take three heart
ruffs. Seeing little future in spades, West made the stronger lead of a club. East
won with the J and returned the 10. Take the South cards after this start. How
would you play the slam?
Only two heart ruffs were possible now, so declarer’s best chance was to take
either a straight finesse or a ruffing finesse in hearts. Boye made East favorite (on
the bidding) to hold the missing K. He won the trump switch in dummy and
finessed the Q. Breathing freely again when the queen won, he ruffed a heart and
returned to his hand with a spade ruff. All followed when a second heart ruff was
taken, so Boye could claim the contract.
You are itching for another bidding problem? Right, you’re sitting South in the
Cavendish tournament in Las Vegas and only the opponents are vulnerable. This
is your hand:
 9 5 2  A 10 4  K 9 7 5  A 6 2

230 | Bridge at the Edge

You pass and West opens 1. Your partner overcalls 3 (weak) and East passes.
You bid 3 to show a good diamond fit and West rebids 4. Pass from the next two
players. What do you do now?
Boye’s length in diamonds suggested that there might be no defensive trick
in that suit. The favorable vulnerability strongly suggested that a sacrifice was in
order. Did you come to the same conclusion, bidding 5?
Boye’s choice was a natural 4NT! The fact that East had chosen hearts as trumps
left some hope that North would hold a spade stopper. Even if the defenders could
run five spade tricks, declarer would have every chance of scoring the remainder
(six diamonds and two aces). That would be two down doubled for a penalty of
just 300. This was the full layout:

E-W Vul.  Q 6 4 2003 Cavendish Teams

Dealer South  8 Las Vegas
 A J 10 8 3 2
 543
 A K 10 7 3  J8
 K Q J 7 6 N  9532
 — W E  Q64
S
 KQ7  J 10 9 8
 952
 A 10 4
 K975
 A62

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Erichsen Brogeland
pass
1 3 pass 3
4 pass pass 4NT (!)
dbl all pass

A contract of 4NT doubled on a combined count of 18 points. Life in the fast lane,
indeed! West led a top spade and switched to the K, Boye winning with the A.
Only one player could hold Qxx after West’s strong bidding in the majors, so Boye
continued with a low diamond to dummy’s ace. It was then a simple matter to
score six diamond tricks and two aces.
The outcome was as Boye had predicted — only two down against a vulnerable
game that would easily have been made. On the cross-IMPing used at the Cavendish,
Boye and Espen scored 100 IMPs more than they would have done by going three
down in 5 doubled.
Have you ever seen a deal where East-West are cold for 3NT, on any lead, but
North-South bid unopposed to the same contract? It happened on this deal:

20 In the Fast Lane | 231

 Neither Vul.  9 8 5 2009 Bermuda Bowl
Dealer South  8 4 Norway - Netherlands
 Q
 10 7 6 5 4 3 2
 10 3  AQ62
 A K 7 N  Q 10 5 3 2
 K 10 6 5 3 2 W E  A4
S
 J8  Q9
 KJ74
 J96
 J987
 AK

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Muller Brogeland de Wijs Lindqvist
1
pass 2 (!) pass 2NT
pass 3 pass 3NT
all pass

When his partner opened 1, Boye could guess that the opponents had a major-suit
game. He decided to psyche a 2 response, which was forcing to game unless he
rebid 3. East was sufficiently impressed to pass, rather than double, and Espen
Lindqvist’s 2NT rebid showed 12-14 points. This was exactly the continuation
Boye would have chosen. He could now bid a non-forcing 3 with every hope that
it would conclude the auction.
Had Lindqvist passed, 3 would actually have been made, combining nicely
with the 3 made with an overtrick by the Norwegian West at the other table.
He looked favorably at his AK, however, and had visions of a low point-count
notrump game being available. 3NT was indeed made… by the defenders. They
scored five hearts, three diamonds and the A to collect +250 and a swing of 3
IMPs.
One of the most difficult areas of bidding is displaying good judgment at the
five-level. Look at the problem Boye faced, holding these cards:

 A 6  A Q J 9 8 7 4  J 10 9 4  —

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
1
pass 2 4 pass
pass 5 ?

232 | Bridge at the Edge

North’s 2 was inverted and only North-South were vulnerable. What action
would you take on Boye’s cards now? This was the full deal:

N-S Vul.  Q 7 2005 Hecht Cup

Dealer South  5 2 Copenhagen, Denmark
 KQ
 K986543
 J 10 9 5 4  A6
 6 N  AQJ9874
 7 6 5 3 2 W E  J 10 9 4
S
 10 7  —
 K832
 K 10 3
 A8
 AQJ2

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brogeland
1
pass 2 4 pass
pass 5 dbl rdbl
all pass

On the second round Boye made an ‘action double’. He could visualize a cheap
save on the East-West cards. The double asked partner to decide whether to defend
or sacrifice. Erik Sælensminde was not delighted to be asked such a question,
particularly when South announced a strong hand with his redouble. He had
no support for hearts and very little defense against the opponents’ club contract.
Hoping that a heart ruff might come his way, he decided to defend.
Sitting East, you win the 6 lead with the A and South follows with the 10.
How will you defend? Many defenders would return the Q; West would ruff and
a subsequent spade trick would put the contract one down. Although it made no
difference as the cards lay, Boye defended more accurately. He cashed the A at
Trick 2. If West held the K, and a doubleton heart, he would give an encouraging
attitude signal on the spade switch. A spade continuation would then defeat the
contract, even if declarer held Axx and would otherwise have been able to discard
one of dummy’s spade losers. Erik played a discouraging card on the A and ruffed
Boye’s switch back to hearts. East-West scored a nervy +400 for one redoubled
undertrick.
We will present the next deal as a bidding problem. Sitting South, with both
sides vulnerable, you hold this hand:

20 In the Fast Lane | 233

 K8 AK842 K7432 J

The bidding (at both tables, in fact) starts like this:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

pass 1 pass 2
pass 2NT pass 3
pass 3 pass 3
pass 3NT pass ?

Partner’s 2NT suggests 12-14 points. What, if anything, will you do next?
The auction had shown that the partnership held a 5-2 fit in each of the majors
— not usually enough to furnish a satisfactory trump suit. Boye reasoned that his
partner would have not have shown his doubleton heart support if he had a double
stopper in clubs. Consequently there was some risk that the clubs would be under-
protected in 3NT.
Boye continued with 4, requesting a choice of games. When partner bid 4
next, Boye raised to 5. Did that end the bidding? No, you will recall that this
chapter is called ‘In the Fast Lane’. Erik Sælensminde raised to 6! This was the
full deal:

Both Vul.  A 7 5 4 3 2006 Euro Championship

Dealer West  9 6 Norway - Ireland
 A J 10
 A94
 Q 9 6 2  J 10
 Q J 5 N  10 7 3
 8 5 W E  Q96
S
 Q732  K 10 8 6 5
 K8
 AK842
 K7432
 J

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Fitzgibbon Sælensminde Mesbur Brogeland
pass 1 pass 2
pass 2NT pass 3
pass 3 pass 3
pass 3NT pass 4
pass 4 pass 5
pass 6 all pass

234 | Bridge at the Edge

How would you play 6 when West leads the 2?
Boye won with dummy’s A, played the two top hearts and ruffed a heart with
the 10. When hearts broke 3-3 he just needed to escape for one trump loser. Any
play is good enough when trumps break 3-2 or West holds a singleton Q. When
East holds four trumps including the queen, you cannot make the contract. What
if West holds four trumps?
Cashing the A first would allow you to pick up the trumps for one loser when
East has a singleton Q. It would cost the contract in the four-times-more-likely
situation where East has a low singleton trump. Boye therefore returned to his
hand with the K and finessed the J. Unless there was a freak ruff, this would cost
nothing when trumps were 3-2 anyway.
Twelve tricks were duly landed and this was worth 16 IMPs when the Irish
South passed 3NT and the contract went down on a club lead. Declarer finessed
West for the Q and lost four clubs and a diamond.
One good bidding problem deserves another. Sitting East, Boye holds:

 9 8  A Q 10 7 4  K J 9 3  7 4

With only North-South vulnerable, the auction unfolds like this:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

1 1 1NT
2 3NT ?

Would you say anything more on that East hand? The North-South auction was
confident and Boye expected the opponents to make 3NT, aided by a long club suit
in the North hand. His answer to the bidding problem was the same as that for the
preceding problem: 4. This passed the message: ‘I am happy to sacrifice in any of
the other three suits. You choose.’
This was the full deal:

20 In the Fast Lane | 235

 N-S Vul.  K 2007 Bermuda Bowl SF
Dealer North  K 8 Norway - Netherlands
 A875
 KQ9863
 Q J 7 6 5 4 2  98
 5 N  A Q 10 7 4
 Q 10 6 W E  KJ93
S
 J5  74
 A 10 3
 J9632
 42
 A 10 2

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Brink Brogeland Drijver
1 1 1NT
2 3NT 4 (!) pass
4 4NT all pass

West led the Q. Give the East cards back to Boye now and pick up the South
hand. How would you play 4NT?
One idea is to lead the K at Trick 2, intending to lead towards the J later.
As the cards lie, Boye would have had to switch to a diamond after winning with
the A. Bas Drijver tried something different. After winning the spade lead, he
led a low diamond from dummy. Boye went in with the K and returned his
remaining spade, South winning with the A. Hoping to endplay East eventually,
Drijver played six rounds of clubs. When he subsequently played ace and another
diamond, West was able to win the trick and the contract went one down. Twelve
IMPs to Norway had been conjured from thin air! At all the other seven tables of
the Bermuda Bowl and Venice Cup quarter-finals, the contract was 3NT — bid and
made.
Later in the match, vulnerable against not, Boye (West) picked up:

A854 5 A97652 62

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

1
pass 4 pass pass
?

You passed over 1, but perhaps some contribution is expected over 4. What do
you reckon?

236 | Bridge at the Edge

 Visualizing a good fit somewhere, Boye stepped into the fast lane and doubled!
If partner chose to defend, that would be fine; his two aces would play a role. Erik
Sælensminde did pass, in fact, and this was the layout:

E-W Vul.  K 2007 Bermuda Bowl QF

Dealer South  J 8 6 4 Norway - Netherlands
 QJ
 10 9 8 7 5 3
 A 8 5 4  J 10 3 2
 5 N  932
 A 9 7 6 5 2 W E  K84
S
 62  AKQ
 Q976
 A K Q 10 7
 10 3
 J4

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Brogeland de Wijs Sælensminde Muller
1
pass 4 pass pass
dbl (!) all pass

The defenders claimed the A and K and Erik returned a spade to Boye’s ace. Two
club tricks brought the penalty to 300.
At the other table Sjoert Brink sat West and overcalled 1NT over 1, showing
four spades and a longer minor in his system. Tor Helness raised to 3 on the
North cards and Bas Drijver (East) bid 4. Take Geir Helgemo’s South cards now.
How would you defend against the spade game?
Geir led a top heart and found the only winning continuation, a second top
heart to force a trump from the dummy. Drijver ruffed in the dummy and led a low
trump, North winning with the K. Declarer won the club switch, ruffed his last
heart in dummy and cashed the A. He could not avoid two further trump losers
and was one down, giving Norway 9 IMPs.
What would happen if declarer led the J after winning the club switch? If
South covers with the Q the contract will be made. Declarer can win with the A,
return to his hand and ruff the last heart. He can then play a club to the ace, draw
another trump and claim ten tricks when diamonds break 2-2. We can be sure that
Helgemo would not have covered the J.

20 In the Fast Lane | 237

 An increasingly popular convention nowadays is the support double:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

1
pass 1 2 ?

If South has any hand containing three-card spade support, he doubles now. A
direct raise to 2 would promise four-card support. You can see how useful it is
to distinguish between the cases. If North holds only four spades, for example, he
may be able to rebid 2. South starts with a support double when holding three-
card support, however weak or strong he may be. The level of the contract can be
sorted out on a subsequent round.
What’s that to do with life in the fast lane? Well, on the next deal Boye
discovered a previously hidden advantage of the method:

N-S Vul.  K Q 9 3 2007 Bermuda Bowl SF

Dealer West  Q 10 4 Norway - Netherlands
 8
 Q7654
 8 4 2  J 10 6
 A K J 6 5 N  73
 3 W E  A 10 9 7 5 4
S
 KJ92  83
 A75
 982
 KQJ62
 A 10

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Sælensminde Muller Brogeland de Wijs
1 pass 1 (!) 2
dbl all pass

With the vulnerability in his favour, Boye decided that the moment was right for a
psychic 1 response. Simon de Wijs entered with 2 and Erik doubled to show his
three-card spade support. North passed and, trying to look casual about it, Boye
passed too. Declarer scored four black-suit tricks and two trumps to go 500 down.
At the other table East chose to respond 1NT instead. Ulf Tundal passed on
the South cards, West bid 2 and East closed the auction with 2. That went three
down and the innocuous-looking deal produced a 12-IMP swing.
We will end the chapter with an amazing bidding deal — the very last played
in the 2008 NABC Spring Nationals.

238 | Bridge at the Edge

 N-S Vul.  J 9 8 7 2 2009 Jacoby Swiss Teams
Dealer East  A Q J 10 6 Houston, Texas
 —
 K 10 7
 K 10 6 4 3  AQ
 4 3 N  9752
 K 8 4 3 W E  A Q 10 9 7
S
 Q9  54
 5
 K8
 J652
 AJ8632

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Molberg Brogeland Aa Lindqvist
1 pass
1 pass 1NT pass
2 pass 2 pass
pass

West’s 2 was a transfer to 2. Boye and Espen Lindqvist had passed five times
between them. However, the bidding was not yet over…

… 2 3 4
pass 4 pass 4
pass 4NT pass 5
pass 6 (!)

Boye protected with 2 and Espen’s 4 was natural (fortified by the knowledge that
partner was very short in diamonds). After two cuebids Boye bid 4NT, a Last Train
slam invitation. Espen signed off in 5 but Boye could not resist bidding 6. East
won the spade lead and switched to a trump, resolving the guess there. A diamond
ruff then brought the total to twelve. Would Espen have guessed the clubs without
East’s helpful switch? We will never know!

20 In the Fast Lane | 239

 21
Back-to-Back
Grand Slams in Pau

The 2008 European Championships were held in Pau, high in the French Pyrenees.
When the last round started, four teams had a good chance of winning the gold
medal: Bulgaria, Germany, Norway and Russia. In the last 20-board match Norway
faced Denmark, who had every prospect of finishing in the top six themselves,
thereby qualifying for the Bermuda Bowl. This final chapter of the book tells the
tale of Boards 14 and 15, where two grand slams were bid.

Neither Vul.  A 2008 Euro Championship

Dealer East  A Q J 9 6 Norway - Denmark, Board 14
 542
 AKJ4
 K Q 9 2  8653
 K 2 N  10 7 5 4
 J 8 W E  63
S
 10 8 7 5 2  Q96
 J 10 7 4
 83
 A K Q 10 9 7
 3

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Hansen Lindqvist Bilde Brogeland
pass 1
1 2 3 4
pass 4 pass 5
pass 5 pass 5NT
pass 7 all pass

Boye takes up the narrative:

Espen’s 2 was a switch bid, as we described in Chapter 18, showing at

least five hearts. Over 3 I admit that for a second I had my hand on

21 Back-to-Back Grand Slams in Pau | 241

 the 3NT card in the bidding box. However, I pulled myself together. With a
probable spade void in Espen’s hand (the overcall suggested five cards and
East’s preemptive raise showed four-card support), a notrump contract
could hardly be right. On the contrary, if partner held diamond support, we
might go a long way together in that suit.
I rebid 4 instead and Espen’s 4 showed a spade control, confirming
diamonds as trumps. I cooperated by showing my club control and
partner’s 5 then suggested a grand slam. With such great trumps, I
could not sign off in 6. Since I had no outside values, however, it would be
too much to jump to 7. I took a middle path by bidding 5NT.
When Espen bid the grand, he knew that 13 tricks might be lay-down,
or it might need a finesse. This combination made the grand slam a good
proposition at the time we contracted for it. Too many players look at
the hands afterwards and say that bidding seven must be wrong, as a
grand slam needs better odds than 50%. The point is that the odds were
around 75% on the information that Espen had when he made his last bid.
To bid the grand was therefore a correct risk to take.

Boye won the 8 lead in his hand. There was more than one way to play the slam
but he decided to take the simple line of a heart finesse through the overcaller. He
led a heart at Trick 2, held his breath and finessed the Q. It won! He played
dummy’s A and returned to his hand with another round of trumps, the suit
breaking 2-2. When he led a second round of hearts, the K appeared from West
and he was able to claim the grand slam.
This was the auction at the other table:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Helgemo Caspersen Lund Kroejgaard
pass 1
1 2 3 3NT
pass 4 pass 4NT
pass 6NT all pass

Mads Kroejgaard did make the 3NT rebid that Boye had contemplated. When his
partner advanced to 4, he declined the slam invitation with a retreat to 4NT, raised
to 6NT. So, not without a degree of good fortune, Norway gained 11 IMPs.
On the next board Boye picked up this hand:

KQ96 94 AQ3 AKQJ

Once again, the ‘main man’ will give you his thoughts at the time.

242 | Bridge at the Edge

I open 2NT, showing 20-21 points, and Espen responds with a transfer bid
of 3. I super-accept by bidding 4, which shows a maximum opening and
four spades. Espen continues with 4, which is a further slam try showing
a shortage, and the next player doubles this.
I now value my hand even more highly. East presumably has the K
or KJ, sitting under my AQ. There is no need to worry about a heart
control, with partner bidding so strongly and the other suits so well held
in my own hand. I continue with Roman Keycard Blackwood and partner’s
5 response shows both major aces. Now, how do I go from here?
If I bid 5NT, this is not only a quest for kings; it is a grand slam try,
promising that we have four aces and the king-queen of trumps. Is that
my right bid? It certainly feels natural and I continue with 5NT. Espen has
nothing more of value to tell me and he rejects my invitation, bidding 6.
This had been the bidding so far:

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Hansen Lindqvist Bilde Brogeland
2NT
pass 3 pass 4
pass 4 dbl 4NT
pass 5 pass 5NT
pass 6 pass ?

As partner denied the Q, he probably has only five spades. With ten
trumps together with me, Espen would have lied about the missing Q
(responding 5) as the card would probably drop. If Espen has another
suit it is probably hearts, where I am short. Maybe he has the AQ? No,
I am not bidding another grand on a heart finesse! This finesse would be
different from the one on the previous board. It now would represent a
50% chance as a best-case scenario, whereas the heart finesse was 50%
as a worst-case scenario on the last board. The difference is huge.
So, I should pass?
Suddenly inspiration strikes me. Wait a minute, there is a great grand
available with clubs as trumps! I can take the diamond finesse, as East’s
double more or less guarantees that he has the king. Then I can ruff my
last diamond and throw my heart loser on the fifth spade! Wow! I can
make 7 even if Espen has only two clubs.
I know that 7 is the right bid in theory. But will it work in practice?
Will Espen pass with two or three or even four small clubs? Can he be sure
that I have a four-card royal flush draw in a suit I only mention at the
seven level? Also, it may not be necessary to bid seven. How likely is it
that the Danes have found 7?

21 Back-to-Back Grand Slams in Pau | 243

 These are substantial arguments against bidding 7. However, I
cannot bear to put up the green pass card. It is against my nature to be
satisfied with the nine when I know I should aim steadily at the bull’s eye.
Bridge is primarily a game, an incredibly entertaining game, regardless of
whether one participates in a club tournament on Thursday evening or in
the European championship. I will be able to forgive myself if we lose the
gold because I bid 7, but I will forever bear a grudge against myself if we
lose because I chicken out in 6.
I take the plunge and bid 7. Espen thinks for a long time on the
other side of the screen. My heart beats faster all the time. He cannot
figure out what my 7 means! At last the bidding tray is returned and
the color drains from my face. He has corrected to 7. This was the full
deal:

N-S Vul.  A J 4 3 2 2008 Euro Championship

Dealer South  A J 2 Norway - Denmark, Board 15
 5
 10 9 4 3
 10 8  75
 K 8 7 3 N  Q 10 6 5
 10 7 2 W E  KJ9864
S
 8752  6
 KQ96
 94
 AQ3
 AKQJ

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Hansen Lindqvist Bilde Brogeland
2NT
pass 3 pass 4
pass 4 dbl 4NT
pass 5 pass 5NT
pass 6 pass 7 (!)
pass 7 all pass

The spade grand slam has no play and goes one down. I cannot understand
how Espen interpreted 7 as anything else than a proposition to play
that contract, but this is neither the time nor the place for a system
discussion. We lose 19 IMPs as Caspersen-Krøjgaard were one of only
three pairs in the championship that managed to bid 7 (and stop there!)
I take a break to collect a glass of water. I pass by Espen and try to
calm him down. This match is still going our way. We have lots of good

244 | Bridge at the Edge

 boards below the belt. Let us just forget the last board, I say. Espen
seems to be in shock, halfway lying in his chair, looking emptily into the air.
I have never seen him like this before.
‘Why did you not jump to 7 directly over 5?’ he asks quietly.
I probably should have, because that bid would have been easily
understandable. The fact that I did not bid 7 on the previous round
created a doubt in Espen’s mind when I finally got around to bidding it.
However, 7 would have been the safest contract if Espen held the heart
king. That was my reason for bidding 5NT. Anyway, I am not going to
spend any more energy thinking about it.

Boye and Espen recovered well from this disastrous misadventure, picking up
several useful scores including an 800 with a speculative double of a 2 contract.
Boye will now describe the conclusion of the championship:

A short while ago, Ron Tacchi, who is the official photographer at all major
championships, came into our room to take a number of pictures. He may
of course only be doing his duty, but I take it as a sign that we are at
least participating in the gold finish. Otherwise, he would be occupied with
snapping photos of Bulgarians, Germans or Russians.
After two more good results on the last boards, we rush out of the
TV room in the basement to find out what the final standings are. In the
doorway, I bump into a top bureaucrat of the EBL, Jean-Claude Beineix of
France. I am looking for a sign. He smiles in a friendly way. I am no longer
sure if he said ‘Congratulations’, ‘Well played’ or ‘You did it’, but I realize
that we have won.

Norway had beaten Denmark by 24 VPs to 6 and these were the final leading
scores:
1. Norway 299
2. Russia 287
3. Germany 286
4. Bulgaria 285

This is the moment. In the style of Björn Borg, I run a couple of steps
before I throw myself on the concrete floor of the basement in Palais
Beaumont. My tears are flowing. To win the Bermuda Bowl is of course
incredibly great, but this feels even better. Not only because it may be a
more difficult competition to win, but also because Espen and I managed
to play above ourselves in our first major tournament together.

21 Back-to-Back Grand Slams in Pau | 245

 Master Point Press on the
Internet
www.masterpointpress.com

Our main site, with information about our books and software,
reviews and more.

www.teachbridge.com

Our site for bridge teachers and students — free downloadable

support material for our books, helpful articles and more.

www.bridgeblogging.com

Read and comment on regular articles from MPP authors and

other bridge notables.

www.ebooksbridge.com

Purchase downloadable electronic versions of MPP books.

INTERMEDIATE/ADVANCED

Bridge Should
Be Fun!
So says Norway’s Boye Brogeland, and he’s a World Champion. If
he didn’t enjoy the game so much, he wouldn’t play it. And he has
his own ideas about how it should be played. He’d rather lose the
world title by bidding a grand that goes down than be branded a
chicken.
So get ready to follow him through the ups and downs of top-
flight competition, as he encounters the proverbial thrill of victory
and agony of defeat. This book is full of new bidding ideas, critical
decisions, great cardplay, and roller-coaster excitement. It’s never
dull — it’s bridge at the edge!

BOYE BROGELAND (Norway) has won both the World and European Championships,
and is a regular participant in top-level North American tournaments.

DAVID BIRD (Southampton, UK) is the author of more than 100 books on bridge.
His most recent include Defensive Signaling and the award-winning Planning the Play
of a Bridge Hand (with Barbara Seagram).

MASTER POINT PRESS